Other settings for Runequest

[Utgardloki]

The thread on other Runequest settings got derailed into a discussion of whether it is better to roll stats or use a point buy system. I'd like to resurrect the conversation on settings for Runequest.

It's easy enough to name settings that could be used for Runequest. Glorantha, Conan, Camelot, Eberron, World of Greyhawk, and Rokugan have already been mentioned. I'd be interested in knowing why as well as what.

My thoughts:

* Glorantha was made for Runequest, and so the Runequest rules provided much of the metaphysical foundation for Glorantha. I'm more looking forward to running adventures on Glorantha than running Runequest adventures, and would happily run a D20 Glorantha if it came out.

* World of Greyhawk was made for D&D. I once started looking into a conversion of Greyhawk into Runequest, and it looked quite interesting how the classes, feats, and prestige classes would be altered to fit the Runequest system.

* Rokugan is currently defined in two systems, and I've mentioned that both of them seem to be limitting somehow. It seems that when there are few classes available, a classless system is better for making it seem like characters are uniquely detailed. This seems to be different when many classes are available, as they are in World of Greyhawk. At any rate, it seems that Runequest and Rokugan would be a good match.

* Islar is a world I made up which has dinosaurs and wizards. Lately I've decided that teleportation spells would be extensively used to get around, and avoid all the dinosaurs and dragons, for those who could afford them. D&D has the feature that in order to get a teleportation spell, your character also needs to get a lot of other features that a 'Porter might not be interested in. Also, the Runequest rules seem like they'd be good for adventuring among dinosaurs.

What other settings would you like to use in Runequest, and why?

 

[Adept]

My thoughts:

* Glorantha was made for Runequest, and so the Runequest rules provided much of the metaphysical foundation for Glorantha. I'm more looking forward to running adventures on Glorantha than running Runequest adventures, and would happily run a D20 Glorantha if it came out.

A minor quib. Rune Quest was tailor made for a game engine for Glorantha, and not the other way around. Glorantha was created by Greg Stafford in 1966.
[And as for d20 Glorantha... Vade Retro!]

* Islar is a world I made up which has dinosaurs and wizards. Lately I've decided that teleportation spells would be extensively used to get around, and avoid all the dinosaurs and dragons, for those who could afford them. D&D has the feature that in order to get a teleportation spell, your character also needs to get a lot of other features that a 'Porter might not be interested in. Also, the Runequest rules seem like they'd be good for adventuring among dinosaurs.

Glorantha has dinosaurs (they are related to dragonewts and dragons) so you'll propably even get some stats for them in the new books. Basically any other system is more flexible than D&D, so anything you can run with D&D you can run with RQ, I'm sure.

Most of the examples you mentioned are unknown to me, so I couldn't comment on those.

One of my personal favorites in Fantasy RPG is Kulthea, also known as Shadow World. There would be a lot of work converting the rich material of Kulthea, but I bet it would be worth it. The setting is originally written for RoleMaster (brr!) but my GM run's his game with Hârnmaster. Epic high fantasy with a gritty and realistic system works wonderfully. RQ would be an easier conversion since it's much less detailed than Hârnmaster.

I wonder if there will be any rules for infections, broken bones and such in the new RQ? Unfortunately I'm pretty sure there won't. Still would be a better game engine for Kulthea than Rolemaster.

 

[Adept]

Chaosium once had a nice little RPG about ElfQuest. That would be a good setting, and most of the work would already be done, if the rights to the old Chaosium material could be had. I wonder what the status of the copyright is these days.

 

[SteveMND]

When you talk about settings being adapted for RQ, do you mean what you think would be cool, or what you think we might see in print? With the OGL approach to the new MGPRQ, we could theoretically see many different worlds out there published for it, but some -- such as Greyhawk and Rokugan -- I'm certain we'll never see, due to IP issues and such.

I remember the Shattered World novel (by an author who's name escapes me at the moment), which was based on the idea of the remnants of a planet spiralling slowly in magical space after a great wizard destroyed the world. It was kinda cool, with the different fragments having their own magical gravity, dragonships sailing from one to the other, etc. Kinda like Spelljammer, sorta, but AFAIK it preceded that setting. I used to even have a whole bunch of RQIII stats for it I was planning on using in a campaign, but never got around to it.

I might actually revisit it if i wasn't already in the process of fleshing out my own campaign world (for the umpteenth time).

Chaosium once had a nice little RPG about ElfQuest

You know, I'd have to disagree about Elfquest being an appropriate fit. Not in a setting sense, but in a game mechanics sense. While I loved the Elfquest series, the RPG always seemed to come up short (IMHO).

Your characters had very little to look forward to in most situations, really. Elves were so long-lived that typical beginning characters were already largely masters of their skills. There wasn't really any gold or economics, so nothing there to strive for there either.

It seemed to me that everything that that could be done in that setting was based on roleplaying -- which is wonderful, don't get me wrong -- but it made the game mechanics largely irrelevant. Elfquest seems to me like it would make a great setting for a narrative style of RPG, though.

 

[Adept]

Chaosium once had a nice little RPG about ElfQuest

You know, I'd have to disagree about Elfquest being an appropriate fit. Not in a setting sense, but in a game mechanics sense. While I loved the Elfquest series, the RPG always seemed to come up short (IMHO).

Your characters had very little to look forward to in most situations, really. Elves were so long-lived that typical beginning characters were already largely masters of their skills. There wasn't really any gold or economics, so nothing there to strive for there either.

It seemed to me that everything that that could be done in that setting was based on roleplaying -- which is wonderful, don't get me wrong -- but it made the game mechanics largely irrelevant. Elfquest seems to me like it would make a great setting for a narrative style of RPG, though.[/quote]

?? I'm not quite getting what the problem is. Are you saying it's important that the character's get to "level up" in play? I don't think that would be helpful or appropriate in an Elfquest game on any level. Parhaps awakening some latent magic powers, or bringing a new skill into the culture.

The world is quite violent, so there is excitement and danger through combat, and those high skills will be needed just to survive. There are just a handful of the wolfriders afterall.

I really liked the game. I wish I'd encountered it as a teenager, and not much later in life.

 

[SteveMND]

I'm not quite getting what the problem is.

Well, what I meant was that due to the advanced experience of the typical PC in ElfQuest, most of the skills critical to survival were already at mastery level (or higher). That made the physical challenges of the world -- climbing, sneaking, combat -- much less of an issue.

Or at least it seemed that way to me. There was little to strive for from a game mechanics point of view, and thus most all of the action was from a role-playing stance. Which, again, was perfectly fine, but it tended to make much of the actual game mechanics largely irrelevant.

In prevous editions of the RQ game, that seems to be a recurring theme (to me at least). At some point in time, one's mastery over the physical and magical means that the mundane world holds little challenge for you anymore. In most campaigns I've been in, at that point the focus of the game shifted to more politics/social gaming, which, by it's nature, tends to be less number-dependant. In some cases, such as Glorantha, there would be the option for Heroquesting, where the 'ground rules,' so to speak, would be rewritten to illustrate the fact that this is no longer the mundane world you're dealing with, and those skills that used to be lorded over the mundane world are now small potatoes in the Hero Plane.

Didn't have as much of that sort of option in ElfQuest, IIRC. As a result, the challenges of the mundane world (which typically could only go so far, and thus became less and less important) and the intricacies of political power/social intreraction (which typically relies very little on numbers) remained the only options.

Not saying it was a bad game, just that I didn't see it as a very good fit for the RQ mechanics because of the latter's heavy reliance on numbers. Elfquest always seemed to me more befitting of a narrative style than a numerical style of gameplay.

 

[Adept]

<snip>
Didn't have as much of that sort of option in ElfQuest, IIRC. As a result, the challenges of the mundane world (which typically could only go so far, and thus became less and less important) and the intricacies of political power/social intreraction (which typically relies very little on numbers) remained the only options.

Not saying it was a bad game, just that I didn't see it as a very good fit for the RQ mechanics because of the latter's heavy reliance on numbers. Elfquest always seemed to me more befitting of a narrative style than a numerical style of gameplay.

I'd say the only thing missing is the "levelling up". I never miss that. I prefer games (and systems) where I can start play with a competent character and where said character's skills don't suddenly zoom up when play starts.

That was one of the problems with the old RQ. You could create a character that had been a warrior for ten years and have skills that were supposed to reflect that. Then, after a few weeks of gaming, you tend to notice that in the last few months of his/her life the character has learned more (especially about combat) than in the previous ten years.

I never liked that. Gaining power for the character isn't a selling point in itself for me. In Hârnmaster when one has managed a special success in a skill, one get's to roll an RQ-like experience roll (except that skills are capped at 100+modifier, and no INT-or less rule exists). If you roll over your skill (minus stat modifier) then the skill goes up one point.

Brilliant! There is progress for excelling with your skills, but it's slow and realistic. The balance is, as I hinted earlier, that the characters start out actually competent.

 

[andakitty]

I keep thinking about Eberron. It just looks like way to much work. Anybody here think there is any chance or would I just be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole? :? And I would only try if I could do it without the D&D core books...

 

[Utgardloki]

You could convert any setting to any system. All you need is a description of the setting.

You probably don't even need to understand the rules for the original setting. It's pretty obvious who the powerful guys are and who the weaklings are. You're never going to get 100%, but I think that's part of the pleasure.

I don't know much about Eberron (although I do have the Eberron book, and all the D&D books). But I'm sure that it would work. It's probably not what I'd pick, since Eberron seems to have been designed to use all the D&D stuff.

 

[RMS]

I'd say the only thing missing is the "levelling up". I never miss that. I prefer games (and systems) where I can start play with a competent character and where said character's skills don't suddenly zoom up when play starts.

That was one of the problems with the old RQ. You could create a character that had been a warrior for ten years and have skills that were supposed to reflect that. Then, after a few weeks of gaming, you tend to notice that in the last few months of his/her life the character has learned more (especially about combat) than in the previous ten years.

I never liked that. Gaining power for the character isn't a selling point in itself for me. In Hârnmaster when one has managed a special success in a skill, one get's to roll an RQ-like experience roll (except that skills are capped at 100+modifier, and no INT-or less rule exists). If you roll over your skill (minus stat modifier) then the skill goes up one point.

Brilliant! There is progress for excelling with your skills, but it's slow and realistic. The balance is, as I hinted earlier, that the characters start out actually competent.

Agreed. I modified the beginning experience system to give players better starting skills. I've found that characters are the most fun to play when they're already experienced and fairly powerful (compared to beginning characters anyway). IMO the whole increase in skills thing goes back to leveling up in D&D and is something best left there. I give a skill check or two every season and that's it. However, characters in my games generally start with several skills in the 80s, 90s, or even over 100. That's never detracted from the game at all in my experience.

 

[Utgardloki]

But I think whether or not PC's should "level up" or gain experience in some way is best left to another thread. I wanted to start this one because the last one about RQ settings got derailed into discussing whether to roll up characters or use point buy.

I'm still a little handicapped by not having had a chance to read the newest RQ rules. To tell the truth, I never gave much thought to creating "Runequest" settings. I get an idea for a system and usually implement it in D&D because that's what I usually play. Occasionally I think that the storyline might be better using the RQ rules, such as when I considered converting World of Greyhawk to Runequest.

Maybe I should recreate my entire multiverse into RQ. (Of course, I won't actually do the work; I'll just say there is a D20 multiverse and a RQ multiverse, each of which has the same worlds but in a different arrangement.)

From the old Glorantha material I have, I liked the idea of a bottomless sea, and having different worlds set off from Glorantha at tremendous differences. I was thinking about this at Country Kitchen last night, and decided having the world separated by hundreds of thousands of miles of sea seemed to be a good idea.

As for whether a setting is better in one system or another, I'm not sure. Certainly in the "Second Mists" setting I created by imagining a Ravenloft realm in which World War II raged, the Dungeons and Dragons system resulted in an adventure that went one way, while using other systems would cause the adventure to go some other way. Better? Worse? You decide. I liked the idea that the PCs could be heroic champions able to survive amazing odds.

OTOH, there are a few settings for D&D where it seems like the class-level based rules don't really capture the idea very well. Rokugan is one of them.

Another one is Ravenloft: The idea of mid- or high- level D&D characters facing gothic horror is one that presents a certain dissonance. I, myself, enjoy this dissonance and have devised (although not run) a Ravenloft adventure for epic level characters in which they can actually start to uncover secrets of the Dark Powers. The dissonance also worked well when I introduced an industrial-technology realm where PCs could see everybody around them chewed up by weapons while they still had a decent chance of survival. But I can certainly see where a system like Runequest more closely fits a setting where the heroes are supposed to be outclassed and outgunned and outnumbered and have to think their way through or they'll all be killed.

I like D&D. I liked Runequest. I never really learned GURPS or D6 or any other fantasy system very well, although I found the d10 system in L5R to be easy to learn, while I do not like the d10 system used by White Wolf games. I liked Villians and Vigilantes, and had plans to run a fantasy game based on that system. But V&V is too old fashioned these days. I've been playing in a Cthulhu Dark Ages game, but find it too aggrevating not being able to do anything really heroic; it does not really support the "Dungeons and Dragons" style adventures we're going on, where my Jewish merchant feels like unwanted baggage.

It's hard for me to imagine Forgotten Realms in Runequest though. :?

 

[Adept]

Any sort of Dark Fantasy setting would work pretty well for RQ. One where even the toughest hero is still mortal, and has to be careful in any knife-fight or tavern brawl he finds himself in.

I don't see a problem with Forgotten Realms and D&D. Actually that would make a fairly interesting mix. Many of the things in Forgotten Realms would be much more intense and scary if one's player character didn't have 70+ hitpoints.

Just imagine a (fairly) realistic system and then facing owlbears, drow and beholders. One would also get rid of the rediculous character classess. If one wanted to make a magic weilding fighter that would work out much better than it ever does in D&D, for instance.

 

[Gaheir]

I like the RQ advancement system. Starting as a youth makes for an epic tale of humble beginnings leading to great heroism. As to the seemingly incredible pace of advancement, most fantasy settings, and certainly Glorantha's Dragon Pass wars era, are times of destiny. The cosmos itself is calling for heroes. Not realistic? Perhaps, but how many 18 year olds rise above the norm and perform heroicly in any war/stress situation? Every culture can claim such in any war.
As a player, seeing advancement regularly is fun. Rather than the level system used in other games where advancement can take a long time, but will frequently make dramatic increases accross the board, RQ allows for gradual increases, concentrated in the skills used the most.
Regarding the original question, settings that would make for a good RQ campaign:in my opinion one of the basic requirements is that the world has to be high mana, but difuse. Magic is part of the world, and most have some access to it, but magic is not overbearing. Personal magic exists for charms of protection and luck, but it is hard to generate dramatic effects like fireballs and lightning bolts. This would disqualify most D&D settings. The Forgotten Realms is a wonderful setting, for AD&D. Khelben Blackstaff would be diminished to take away his overwhelming magical ability. Good settings would be Arthur's England, being worked on, or Middle Earth (small magic is everywhere-Even the most powerful mages <Gandalf> displayed only limited power). Another setting I would enjoy, but would require major changes in magic would be Kurtz' Deryni series.

 

[Adept]

Magic is part of the world, and most have some access to it, but magic is not overbearing. Personal magic exists for charms of protection and luck, but it is hard to generate dramatic effects like fireballs and lightning bolts. This would disqualify most D&D settings. The Forgotten Realms is a wonderful setting, for AD&D. Khelben Blackstaff would be diminished to take away his overwhelming magical ability.

If the Mongoose RQ is unable to simulate really powerful magic it won't do all that well modelling the Second Age of Glorantha. This is the time of EWF and Godlearners. Dragonmagic and powerful sorcery (as well as heroic level theism) are the order of the day. Worshippers of Orlanth can fly, toss enemies aside with gusts of wind, bring down storms and fry enemies with thunderbolts. The most powerful sorcerers are fierce indeed commanding elemental and runic powers, and the EWF dragonlords can even turn into dragons in a fight!

If RQ can do that, it sure can simulate mr. Blackstaff. It's not the ability to cast prismatic sphere or timestop that makes an archmage, it's the power and versatility of his magic in comparison with the more common people.

 

[Lakritsploppen]

I Would love to see Slaine converted to MGRQ, as much as i like Slaine (& celtic, teutonic stuff). Do i feel quite the opposite for 3.5 D20. So i hope that mongoose does some Rq companions for there d20 stuff (just having the stats & setting rules) so you could use 'em with MGRQ.

 

[Gaheir]

I agree that an archmage is defined by his power and versatility compared to others. But, in the Forgotten Realms that capability implies the fireballs, meteor swarms and timestops. Unless you choose to discount the sourcebooks and fantasy surrounding the setting, you must include this style of magic which is foreign to RQ. The abilities to fly or strike with lightning (a single target) are within RQ's bounds. The powers of an AD&D archmage, in the Forgotten Realms, would call for regiments of mages in Glorantha. The heroes of the 2nd Age did not work alone. Their great rituals called upon the powers of nations and cults.

 

[The King]

I would like an adaptation of Le Guin's Earthsea. 8)

 

[Adept]

I would like an adaptation of Le Guin's Earthsea. 8)

That would be nice, but I wonder if the magic system of the new RQ will be versatile enough. It could work. Those books are _actually_ quality literature, in addition to being a great "grown up" fantasy story. I love the authors use eloquent and powerful use of english.

 

[Utgardloki]

I forgot to mention Testament, a D20 treatment of the ancient middle east.

I have long intended to run a campaign based in the ancient Middle East. I probably should have considered using Runequest instead of D&D, but either one would work. Runequest would probably be better because of its treatment of iron vs bronze weapons and armor; the difference would be that rather than getting iron "sealed" to your personal runes, iron would only be available from the cultures that learned how to work it so it could actually be used in battle.

 

[andakitty]

Try a Google search for 'Warlords of Alexander'.