Runequest vs Call of Cthulhu

[Utgardloki]

I was talking with a friend again about a potential "Moonquest" game, for which the concept is hard science fiction intrigue and espionage set on the Moon in the late 21st Century. Tech level is what I call "Middle Cybernetic", which includes artificial intelligence, bionics, cybernetic and genetic enhancement, large thermonuclear reactors, and interplanetary space travel. The setting has no magic.

I am considering two systems, Runequest or Call of Cthulhu. My question is which would be the better fit.

The systems are of course very similar. I am leaning towards Cthulhu, but am not certain yet.

Any ideas of pros and cons?

 

[AikiGhost]

The systems are of course very similar. I am leaning towards Cthulhu, but am not certain yet.

Any ideas of pros and cons?

Id go with CoC as it is better supported for modern play at the moment and the EDU stat will be quite useful in a modern or sci fi setting.

 

[Trifletraxor]

Call of Cthulhu without doubt.

SGL.

 

[canology]

I suspect that due to the OGL that we will be seeing MRQ expand out into other genres. So if you won't be running the Moonquest game for a while you may want to wait and see what happens.
I know that there is work on a Gatecrasher MRQ rewrite

For those that don't know, Gatecrasher is a science-fiction/high fantasy mix... sorta like that game by Palladium that earns you a cease and desist order if you mention it online. :roll:

 

[ottarrus]

I'd likewise go with CoC for a modern game, if only that cyber-gear ought to have a price beyond dollars (credits/nuyen/whatever). In Cyberpunk this was the Empathy trait, in ShadowRun it was the Humanity score, but I really think that there is a personal toll to getting artificial implants, and SAN could work just fine.

I've used the SAN characteristic as a 'bravery-meter' in a past WWII game, with some events and actions requiring a SAN roll and loss. For example, watching a person you don't know get hit by a sniper was 1/1d6. Watching a squad-buddy you went through basic training with get hit by a sniper was 1/1d8. It seems to me that SAN can be used the same way so that someone doesn't completely 'borg out.

I'm looking forward to seeing what the 'Goose has planned for RQ and modern or sci-fi games. It ought to interesting.

 

[soltakss]

Well, CoC is cut-down RQ anyway, with the exception of EDU, rubbishy magic and sanity rules. As I don't like CoC, I'd go with RQ as RQ is a more flexible system and will have supplements geared towards modern and futuristic settings.

So, RQ without doubt. Use the CoC weapon stats, though.

 

[Trifletraxor]

Well, CoC is cut-down RQ anyway, with the exception of EDU, rubbishy magic and sanity rules. As I don't like CoC, I'd go with RQ as RQ is a more flexible system and will have supplements geared towards modern and futuristic settings.

So, RQ without doubt. Use the CoC weapon stats, though.

Call of Cthulhu is a cut-down of RQ3 with some added rules. It is not a cut-down of MRQ, which is way different. CoC allready works good in the modern setting.

SGL.

 

[Utgardloki]

I suppose science fiction weapons could be a reason to use Runequest. Cthulhu has rules for guns, but I prefer the way that D20 Modern handles automatic weapons, and intend to have similar rules for my own Runequest Modern project.

(Call of Cthulhu, if I understand correctly, handles automatic weapons like most other games, where a fraction of the bullets fired have a chance to hit. D20 Modern considers automatic weapon to create an area effect attack that requires a Reflex save for half damage.)

Runequest may be even better equiped for automatic weapons because it has a rule requiring characters Dive for Cover if they wish to avoid full damage from an area attack, and has rules for characters who are mounded, helpless, targetted, prone, or lacking of a plausible way to dive for cover. These rules seem to be very apropos for someone facing machine gun fire (or energy weapon equivalents).

Very nasty, really. I guess the moral of the story is you don't want to be shot at by a machine gun while you are balanced on a tightrope above a pool of lava. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

It's probably easy to specify that some area effect weapons (such as machine guns) damage 1D4 hit locations instead of damaging every hit location (as a flamethrower would do).

 

[ottarrus]

(Call of Cthulhu, if I understand correctly, handles automatic weapons like most other games, where a fraction of the bullets fired have a chance to hit. D20 Modern considers automatic weapon to create an area effect attack that requires a Reflex save for half damage.)

The reason why alot of systems rate a percentage of rounds hitting (as opposed to AoE) is that the vast majority of rounds fired by an automagic weapon hit nothing but dirt. This is why most Western modern battle rifles are equipped with a 3-round burst instead of full auto. Even the latest model of AK (a 'spray and pray' weapon if ever there was one) has a 3 round burst governor, though it is in addition to full auto.

So, IMHO, this is how I'd do it for CoC:

If one is being fired at by a full auto weapon (machine gun, smg, whatever), roll a DEX save for AoE damage. If, however, one is being fired upon by a weapon with a burst governor, roll one standard to-hit roll. If successful, all rounds hit and roll hit locs as normal. And for crying out loud, don't forget your Dodge roll!

 

[Utgardloki]

Certainly it is easy enough to create "area of effect" modes/rules for weapons, in any game system. The other rules may affect how they play out in they game.

For example, D20 Modern makes it easier to survive machine gun fire. Before reading these rules, I had developed something similar when I wanted to run a World War II D&D game, and ended up with an 11th level gypsy Theif-Acrobat who happend to be almost immune to machine gun fire, as in she could be standing in the middle of a field, and continue picking flowers as a guy is firing an SMG at her.

(Of course, that ability didn't work if someone were to actually target her directly. Then she'd have to rely on her Dexterity and Dodge bonuses to AC.)

Not that there is anything necessarily long with that :shock: It's just different my my experience with the Sqaud Leader game, where you did not even want to run across the street if there were enemies with machine guns around.

Almost Immune To Machine Gun Fire would be a cool Legendary Ability for a Runequest Modern game.

An advantage of Cthulhu might be that a human with a Dodge skill above 90 is close to "the top of the game", while in Runequest, that would probably be just the beginning. (You can bet that any player interested in keeping a PC alive more than two sessions will put as much into Dodge as possible.) Having to invest as much as possible into one area (such as defensive skills) could prove to be restricting to character concepts. This could be a disadvantage for a game system that offers a lot of options for defense.

In other words, while a Cthulhu PC would just max out defense and get on with life, a Runequest PC might be forced to concentrate everything on defense.

 

[Loz]

Well, CoC is cut-down RQ anyway, with the exception of EDU, rubbishy magic and sanity rules. As I don't like CoC, I'd go with RQ as RQ is a more flexible system and will have supplements geared towards modern and futuristic settings.

So, RQ without doubt. Use the CoC weapon stats, though.

Surely it's version of Basic Roleplaying, rather than RQ (and certainly not MRQ). And if you want to pursue the whole RQ thing, then surely it'd be a cut-down version of RQ2, rather than RQ3, on account of the fact that CoC predates RQ3 by some years...?

 

[Adept]

<snip>
Even the latest model of AK (a 'spray and pray' weapon if ever there was one) has a 3 round burst governor, though it is in addition to full auto.
<snip>

Just a minor nitpick. The AK-47 (as I assume you mean here) or Kalashnikov, isn't a spray 'n pray weapon. The finnish army uses a locally produced version RK-62, which is basically a kalashnikov built with tighter tolerances.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rk-62

With the heavy 7.62 bullet the weapon has good ballistics, and is more accurate than the M-16. The Kalashnikov has horrible recoil (as does the finnish variant) and so is practically always used for accurate single fire. Even when firing suppressive fire, the army trains people to use the single fire mode.

There are times and places for autofire with the AK-47, but it's not a weapon that's meant for spraying bullets around like the US soldiers did in Vietnam.

Uh... parhaps I've been working on my firearm rules a bit too much lately.

 

[simonh]

Automatic fire without a burst governor is only realy useful for area suppression where you're not realy all that bothered about actualy hitting them just keeping their heads down, and very close quarters combat such as room-to-room where a 3 round burst isn't realy much help.

The British Army assult rifle isn't fitted with a mechanical burst governor, relying on training to fir short controlled bursts. i.e. the burst governor is your sergeant kicking you're head in, not a mechanism in the weapon. That way if you legitimately want to fill a room with lead, you still can.

A rule that makes full auto-fire essentialy useless beyond say around DEX metres would be about right.

 

[Adept]

A rule that makes full auto-fire essentialy useless beyond say around DEX metres would be about right.

Seconded.

It's very useful when fighting to "clean up" a trench, or when bursting in through a door to kill everybody in the room. Other than that, the usefulness is limited.

A great way to get people to hit the deck though.

 

[Utgardloki]

Automatic fire without a burst governor is only realy useful for area suppression where you're not realy all that bothered about actualy hitting them just keeping their heads down,

But what happens if people you are firing at do *not* keep their heads down, either because they are stupid, or because they are not able to dive for cover? (This could happen very easily on the Moon, if there are lots of places which are open without cover readily available.)

Of course, in a science fiction game, few people will be using M-16s or AK-47s. (I am also working on a Modern game set in the 1970s, so information about contemporary weapons is apropos.) I'm thinking of a scene in Aeon Flux where Aeon is pulling bullets out of Goodkind's body and asking "Did any if the bullets manage to miss you?"

I do remember a trailer for a movie, and short stories, where bullets were able to track their targets like micro guided missiles. But I don't think my "Middle Cybernetic" setting is quite that advanced yet.

Most people would probably be using energy weapons. Some areas may have severe restrictions on bullets, while others would have lead and depleted uranium readily available on the black market. But still, if you want to shoot somebody, why leave bullets behind for evidence?

 

[sexy_davey]

Soz if someone has already mentioned this, but Chaosium have released a mongraph covering a similar setting for CoC, called Cthulhu Rising. It's set in the 23rd Century, but may be useful

 

[Durand Durand]

There are things I really like about CoC & RQ, the choice comes down to deciding on the level of complexity you wanted to run in fights and level of heroic's you wanted in play.

If you can find a copy and spare the cash, get the Ringworld RPG. It's BRP sci-fi well worth a look, but a tad expensive to get a copy these days. The last copy I saw sell online cost over US$150 (bargain), whereas I got mine in a second hand bookshop for AU$30 a few years back. I even gave another copy away to someone a while back, since it was a cool gift and I found it relatively cheap.

DD

 

[simonh]

Automatic fire without a burst governor is only realy useful for area suppression where you're not realy all that bothered about actualy hitting them just keeping their heads down,

But what happens if people you are firing at do *not* keep their heads down...

Well, you're not very likely to hit them. Certainly at, say 100m you're chances of hitting while on full auto are a LOT lower than if you were firing controlled bursts. Even at 25m I'd bet on the controlled bursts guy. Even if you're shooting into a crowd, sustained automatic fire is very wastefull because many of those bollets will go into people you're already hit enough, whereas with controlled bursts you'll make more efficient use of ammo and thus actualy slot more bad guys.

Most people would probably be using energy weapons. Some areas may have severe restrictions on bullets, while others would have lead and depleted uranium readily available on the black market. But still, if you want to shoot somebody, why leave bullets behind for evidence?

The equasion changes a bit if you're using a weapon with zero or extremely low recoil.

A way to do this might be to have seperate rules for single shots, controlled bursts and autofire, but for low/no recoil weapons allow use of the controlled bursts rules with very long 'bursts'.

For a 9mm SMG there might be an argument to extend the effective range on full auto by say an extra 5m compared to a 5.56mm assault rifle or AK.

 

[Gallowglass]

Soz if someone has already mentioned this, but Chaosium have released a mongraph covering a similar setting for CoC, called Cthulhu Rising. It's set in the 23rd Century, but may be useful

Also, much of the info from the monograph is freely available online at the Cthulhu Rising website, including a number of scenarios and other additional material, plus forums etc. Well worth a look IMO.

Cheers,

NDM

 

[Utgardloki]

Well, you're not very likely to hit them. Certainly at, say 100m you're chances of hitting while on full auto are a LOT lower than if you were firing controlled bursts. Even at 25m I'd bet on the controlled bursts guy. Even if you're shooting into a crowd, sustained automatic fire is very wastefull because many of those bollets will go into people you're already hit enough, whereas with controlled bursts you'll make more efficient use of ammo and thus actualy slot more bad guys.

Hmmm, maybe you're thinking of the scenario where there is one guy with an assault rifle, and one guy standing 30 yards away. And perhaps you're right about that. That one guy standing 30 yards away is more likely to get killed if you can specifically target him with a controlled burst of fire than if you just fill the area he's standing in with lead bullets.

On the other hand, if you have a bunch of guys 30 yards away, and you want to kill as many of them as possible, then automatic fire seems like the better option. That seems more in line with what I've read about World Wars I and II, and my experience in Squad Leader when I took a platoon across the street and it didn't make it. As explained by the guy who was teaching me the game, he explained that maybe two or three guys would have made it across the street.

I also remember that archers can also set up essentially area of effect fire; when a unit of archers is defending an area against a unit of infantry or calvary, the archers can just fire into the attackers, making life for any specific attacker dangerous.

I also remember a situation where a player running a radio expert PC wanted to fire at a mob of zombies 100 feet away. I am aware that a pistol would have almost no accuracy at that range, but the house rules I was using would have a significant chance of hitting one of the zombies in the mob other than the one she was aiming at, since there was a whole mob of them. I guess that seems reasonable, that even though Zombie X was probably safe, it wouldn't really matter as long as one of the zombies got hurt.

(Of course, hurting one zombie in a mob of zombies might not be the best combat tactic for that situation. I guess it was a good thing that the character was a radio expert and not a military tactics expert.)