Runequest vs heroquest

[atgxtg]

First off, my orginal comparsion of AP to HPs holds. I was doing a comparison of combat in the orginal post and how HQ combat differens in feel from RQ combat. Rolling a d20 and losing points is something that HQ and D&D share.

But gaining points is something they do not share. Really "You role a twenty sider in both games" is a rather superficial similarity.

Gaining points doesn't come up that often,b eing limited to extended tests. Even the raise, is limited to what can be transferred from the oppoent, so it really is just speeding up the dropping of points of the opposition. D&D healing being as common as it is, does mean that points going up in combat are likely.

On the characters: The only D&D-style (Actually Arduin) ones I've seen were in the back of Wyrms Footprints, reprinted from Wyrms Footnotes. These are credited to one Dave Hargrave.

That was because Arduin was orginally written to be the Glorantha RPG. It was Greg's regection of Arduin that led eventually to RQ.

On Perrin being a Gloranthaphile: Apparantly he isn't. IIRC he's specifically said he isn't, and the on the one occasion I met him face to face at a RQ con he asked the GM what the Kingdom of War was, which would seem to confirm that. As for the original drafts being more D&D like, it is my understanding that this is exactly what he changed when he came aboard the project.

Yeah, Steve isn't a Gloranthaphile. THat is part of the reason why he has done a lot of work on the non-Gloranthan stuff. Not knowing Kingosm of War is easy to explain, not much was mentioned about it until RQ3's Glroantha book anyway. THat was one of the projects that Steve had little to do with. He was ussally called in to write a game system, while others came in to write the setting and adventures.

Steve is generally creditied with most of the changes to the second rules set. It was still very D&D ish until he decided to go off in a differenrt direction. In the end we got RQ. According to both Greg and Steve RQ and GLorantha were never really a good match.

On running a Glorantha campaign using D&D rules: Difficult but possible. It would definitely require a whole new magic system.

Maybe. Some of Greg's recent comments seem to indicate that he isn't worried much about the magic system used in Glorantha. IMO, I'd probably use something different. THe biggest problem is with the actual D&D spells rather than the system used to implement it.

Back wihen I wrote my "crossover" adventure for D&D 3.0 I worked up a simple interpretation of Battle./Spirit Magic that worked okay in D&D. THe biggest problem was actually figuring out how to work Heal into D&D. I think I went with 1HP/character level to get the same sort of effect it got in RQ. THat is Heal 1 = 1 day's healing.


With MRQ it would be even easier to mate up, since many D&D concepts have counterparts in MRQ (but not in RQ). Persistence for Will saves, Resilience for CON saves, Dodge for DEX saves. POW variance from spellcasting not affecting magic combat. Heck a d20 Sourcebook for Imperal Age would be easy.

Heck you could do a good job of mimicing HQ's augments with the aid ability. Instead of doing RQ conversion of bladesharp, you could use Aid.

All in all it is much easier to portray Glorantha in D&D than it is to get a good conversion of a RQ character to D&D. Glorantha, is actually failry rules independant now. HQ, by being so differenrt from RQ helped in breaking GLorantha away from any particluar system.

Glorantha with D&D would be pretty easy to do. In fact, I think there is a websight or two that does it already. Not something that I'd prefer to play, but it isn't hard to do.

While there's plenty of epic level stuff in HQ, there's also alot of mundane level activity such as cattle raids, match-making, etc.

Sure, but that is in pretty much every game. You need the mundane stuff to contrast with the heroic stuff. Otherwise the Heroic feels mundane. THat is one reason why most myths and legends have some pretty mundane things in them. They provide contrast and also help to anchor the myth with something "real". Doing a cattle raid in D&D wounld not be hard either. Especially if you consider the Celtic tradations that go with such raids. Many were quite larger than life too.

 

[burdock]

atgtx wrote

Stop and insult someone who is holding a sword and he just cut you down. Not drop his wepon, start bawling and head home to mommy.

It depends on the kind of story you are telling. In stories anything is possible.

If a PC had a "shock with voice" ability then I would allow them to attempt to make the sword weilding opponent dither. They still may get whacked in the next exchange but by an opponent who is less sure of him/her self. And depending on the circumstances (for example if the combat began as a debate) I would allow someone to use "Argue" to change the tone and method of the exchange. This would be subject to a substantial penalty.

The beauty of HQ is that anything is possible in the unfolding of the tale. Combat is not restricted to "I whack him" "I hit him" " I swing at him"...ad infinitum

 

[Mark Mohrfield]

Gaining points doesn't come up that often,b eing limited to extended tests.

No, it is NOT uncommon! Every game contest will probably have at least one extended contest. It is "uncommon" only relative to unextended contests. Furthermore, it's relative frequency of occurance is not an indication of it's being unimportant. the whole purpose of the extended contest is to use at points were it is dramaticly appropriate.

Even the raise, is limited to what can be transferred from the oppoent, so it really is just speeding up the dropping of points of the opposition.

No, it does not. It represents the gaining of some kind of advantage over the opponent. A character with low APs can still win quickly if he makes a desperation stake.

D&D healing being as common as it is, does mean that points going up in combat are likely.

But what it represents is different from gaining APs, and how HPs are gained is different from how APs are gained.

 

[Mark Mohrfield]

That was because Arduin was orginally written to be the Glorantha RPG. It was Greg's regection of Arduin that led eventually to RQ.

I am almost certain that this is incorrect. While some of the Dragon Pass characters were wrtten up in Arduin stats, Arduin was written for, well, Arduin.

 

[atgxtg]

That was because Arduin was orginally written to be the Glorantha RPG. It was Greg's regection of Arduin that led eventually to RQ.

I am almost certain that this is incorrect. While some of the Dragon Pass characters were wrtten up in Arduin stats, Arduin was written for, well, Arduin.

I read interviews of Greg Stafford, and Steve Perrin that claim otherwise. Now it is possible that the fog of 30 years may have affected them, but there is evidence to support this thinking.

Both Steve and Greg have mentioned that RQ and GLoratha were not a good fit for each other. Both were innovative, but in differenrt ways.

 

[atgxtg]

atgtx wrote

Stop and insult someone who is holding a sword and he just cut you down. Not drop his wepon, start bawling and head home to mommy.

It depends on the kind of story you are telling. In stories anything is possible.

And that is probably one reason a lot of RQ's are not fond of HQ. I know it is one of the things that I dislike about it. THat works for a certain style of stroytelling, but can ruin other types. It is probably one of the big differences between RQ and HQ. Basically, nothing is consistient and it all comes down to what aparticular GM feels like allowing.

quote="burdock"]The beauty of HQ is that anything is possible in the unfolding of the tale. Combat is not restricted to "I whack him" "I hit him" " I swing at him"...ad infinitum[/quote]


Depends. Not all contests are considered combat. A mean I supposed you could run an "insult contest to the death", but I just think that's sillly. Something from the Montry Python RPG, or tapping into a previous post, the old Warner Borthers cartoons ("Wait a minute! Those are train tracks so you must be trying to track a train!")

Basically it ia a difference in styles. Probably touching upon Lord Twigs comments here. It is something that you can do with HQ, but not something I would want people to be able to do in most of my RPG games.

 

[atgxtg]

Gaining points doesn't come up that often,b eing limited to extended tests.

No, it is NOT uncommon! Every game contest will probably have at least one extended contest. It is "uncommon" only relative to unextended contests. Furthermore, it's relative frequency of occurance is not an indication of it's being unimportant. the whole purpose of the extended contest is to use at points were it is dramaticly appropriate.

Now this is where things get funny and sort of points out something that I don't like about HQ. There is someone else on this board who run HQ who alomost never uses extended contrests, and says that they are not really needed.

Now you say that nearly every game constest will have an extended contests. Very different. Depdening on which one of you two were running would make a world of difference to how a character could get through a session.

Even the raise, is limited to what can be transferred from the oppoent, so it really is just speeding up the dropping of points of the opposition.

No, it does not. It represents the gaining of some kind of advantage over the opponent. A character with low APs can still win quickly if he makes a desperation stake.

If I even own a casino, I'm inviting you. Casinos thrive on people who believe just that. While it is mathematically possible, the net game effect is similat to saying that a 1st level fighter has a chance against a 10 level fighter. Mathematically yes, realistically, no.

If someone is overmatched in HQ, the bid really only determines how long it takes for them to be defeated. If you are using Spear 17 and the other guy has Greataxe 17W3 you could desparate bid you socks off. Barring some hHero Points and a series of "one in 400 chance" rolls, you are toaste.

D&D healing being as common as it is, does mean that points going up in combat are likely.

But what it represents is different from gaining APs, and how HPs are gained is different from how APs are gained.[/quote]

What either "represent" is totallt subjective. 1 AP +1 AP regardless of what the contest is or how many you have. If an of themselves they are aonly used as a form of "currency" during a contest. Likewise, hit points do actually reprsent serious injuries but a "fighting currency". Certain D20 games even use a Wound Point/Vitiality point disction. Even the decrip of AP's note that to some extend they do repensent things like wounds and fatigue. They sort of half to, because nothing else in the game does measure that. By having APs used for everything, then APs can represent anything.

 

[burdock]

atgtx wrote

I know it is one of the things that I dislike about it. THat works for a certain style of stroytelling, but can ruin other types.

Yeah. Heroquest has a very faerytale-like or "Mythy" quality to me. It sacrafices solidity for fluidity.

 

[RMS]

Now this is where things get funny and sort of points out something that I don't like about HQ. There is someone else on this board who run HQ who alomost never uses extended contrests, and says that they are not really needed.

That's me. I don't use Extended Contests very often. They just don't come up that often in play, in my experience. I just started a new group in HQ, so we'll see what happens this time. I've mentioned before that I basically let the player pick when something is important enough to warrant an extended contest. In the past, it's every 3-4 game sessions on average, and ironically are usually for side issues that are just fun to play through. Extended contests are great for Trollball and Shieldpush!

Now you say that nearly every game constest will have an extended contests. Very different. Depdening on which one of you two were running would make a world of difference to how a character could get through a session.

Definitely. HQ is open enough that I'm sure there's a vast difference from group to group on it. OTOH, I'm sure that my RQ game would be a fair bit different than a lot of peoples, too.

If someone is overmatched in HQ, the bid really only determines how long it takes for them to be defeated. If you are using Spear 17 and the other guy has Greataxe 17W3 you could desparate bid you socks off. Barring some hHero Points and a series of "one in 400 chance" rolls, you are toaste.

That definitely is a contest that I would never waste time setting up as an extended contest. Roll once, get it over with, and move on. Btw, the HQ resolution is a bit wonky (very nonlinear), so the odds of someone winning a contest is a bit deceptive at first. With 3 masteries difference, the roll is basically a formalaty, but with a full mastery difference it's far from certain.

What either "represent" is totallt subjective.

I agree with you. AP in HQ is basically the same sort of thing as D&D HP. Neither equals anything concrete, but both represent an abstraction of ability to take "wounds" in the system. The mechanics are a bit different, but at the core they're very similar. HQ AP and D&D HP certainly have far more in common than either do to RQ HP, for example.

 

[simonh]

quetzalcoatl wrote

If I were running, I could see allowing someone to augment his fighting ability with insults

Ah...I didn't mean using argument skills to augment but as an an attack in itself

I know what you mean't. BUt like I posted earilier, I just don't see it as a reasonable action. The rules might let you use anything, but I don't see it as something I'd allow as a GM. Stop and insult someone who is holding a sword and he just cut you down. Not drop his wepon, start bawling and head home to mommy.

Sorry for the extensive quote, but this exchange is a classic example of a simple missunderstanding of what HeroQuest actualy allows. It also doen't help that it's also often missrepresented, perhaps inadvertently, by some of it's fans.

Suppose two characters are in an extended contest. Their goals for the contest can be radicaly different. Character A might want to get Character B to admit his guilt in a crime, meanwhile character B is trying to slice open character A's gizzard with a cleaver.

On Character A's turn he uses his "Biting Wit" ability to try to needle B into an admission. B needs to resist with an apropriate ability such as "Cool Headed", resisting with "Close Combat" would be useless. On Character B's turn he attacks with his Close Combat using the Cleaver, and character A had better defend with an appropriate combat, agility, etc ability or he's dead meat. Resisting with "Biting Wit" would be a one way ticket to massive blood loss.

Extended contests can be very asymetrical, but this level o asymetry is in my experience extremely rare. Nevertheless it is the only game I have ever seen that can accurately and successfuly represent the asymetrical, or at least simultaneous contests of this kind we often see in literature and cinema. However it is simply impossible in HeroQuest to defend against a sword using an ability like "Razor Sharp Wit" or such. Those that say it can are talking through their arse, and doing the game no favours thereby.

Simon Hibbs

 

[homerjsinnott]

Suppose two characters are in an extended contest. Their goals for the contest can be radicaly different. Character A might want to get Character B to admit his guilt in a crime, meanwhile character B is trying to slice open character A's gizzard with a cleaver.

On Character A's turn he uses his "Biting Wit" ability to try to needle B into an admission. B needs to resist with an apropriate ability such as "Cool Headed", resisting with "Close Combat" would be useless. On Character B's turn he attacks with his Close Combat using the Cleaver, and character A had better defend with an appropriate combat, agility, etc ability or he's dead meat. Resisting with "Biting Wit" would be a one way ticket to massive blood loss.

Extended contests can be very asymetrical, but this level o asymetry is in my experience extremely rare. Nevertheless it is the only game I have ever seen that can accurately and successfuly represent the asymetrical, or at least simultaneous contests of this kind we often see in literature and cinema. However it is simply impossible in HeroQuest to defend against a sword using an ability like "Razor Sharp Wit" or such. Those that say it can are talking through their arse, and doing the game no favours thereby.

Simon Hibbs

Thanks Simon, that was useful and gives me a little more respect for the system. Couldn't they use it to get them to stop attacking or attack someone else or get them so mad they said or did something stupid?

If someone is overmatched in HQ, the bid really only determines how long it takes for them to be defeated. If you are using Spear 17 and the other guy has Greataxe 17W3 you could desparate bid you socks off. Barring some hHero Points and a series of "one in 400 chance" rolls, you are toaste.


That definitely is a contest that I would never waste time setting up as an extended contest. Roll once, get it over with, and move on.

I was wondering why not give the asymetrical contest a chance, isnt that one of the things RQ allowed for? And why not give the less skilled a chance to extend there lives a little longer perhaps for a death (to be) speech?

 

[burdock]

simonh wrote

However it is simply impossible in HeroQuest to defend against a sword using an ability like "Razor Sharp Wit" or such. Those that say it can are talking through their arse, and doing the game no favours thereby.

See my entry after the one you quoted on the same page.

Although the Sword vs Shield exchange is going on simultanaeously to the Argue vs Stubborn exchange they are using the same pool of APs so by definition are part of the same contest. (otherwise you are nesting extended contests which is a big no no). When I used the word" attack" in association with the non combat skill I did not mean an attack directly against the opponents weapon skill but against an appropriate skill of the opponent. I could have made this more clear.

 

[RMS]

Thanks Simon, that was useful and gives me a little more respect for the system. Couldn't they use it to get them to stop attacking or attack someone else or get them so mad they said or did something stupid?

Yes, it was a good example of what can happen in HQ. It would be rare, but the rules do support it.

If someone is overmatched in HQ, the bid really only determines how long it takes for them to be defeated. If you are using Spear 17 and the other guy has Greataxe 17W3 you could desparate bid you socks off. Barring some hHero Points and a series of "one in 400 chance" rolls, you are toaste.

That definitely is a contest that I would never waste time setting up as an extended contest. Roll once, get it over with, and move on.

I was wondering why not give the asymetrical contest a chance, isnt that one of the things RQ allowed for? And why not give the less skilled a chance to extend there lives a little longer perhaps for a death (to be) speech?

I wrote the response. I'm not sure why you think I wouldn't give a contest, like Simon mentions, a chance. That isn't what I was talking about. I was just stating that I wouldn't bother setting up an extended contest for a straight up fight involving 17 vs. 17W3. (Note that I stated before that I don't run very many extended contests when I run HQ.) Choosing an extended contest vs. simple contest has nothing to do with extending the character's life or getting a chance for a death speech. In either case, the amount of in-world time the character lived would be the same, and in either case the player could certainly do a death speech. The contest chosen doesn't affect anything beyond how long you want to spend with a particular conflict, in most cases. A simple contest allows you to roll once and then narrate the results. An extended contest allows you to narrate step-by-step through the contest: it just takes more time with the actual dice rolling.

 

[atgxtg]

I think the thing about HQ that is being illustrated here is that more than most RPGs, it is very subjective and what is and isn't allowed depends on the GM's intepretation, and how well a player can influnce that.

What this means is that there really isn't a common set of rules to fall back on or rely on. Upon how well you know and trsut the GM.

I said earily how I though you would really need to trsut a GM for HQ to work. Part of that means that you have to trust his way of looking at and resoliving things.

Now I've gamed with a few people in my day, and there are some GMs that I see mostly eye to eye with andothers who I disagree with on practically everything. I can't find two gamers who agree on everything (or two non-gamers either).

With a game like HQ, players really need to have faith in their GMs veiw of things and like his style of intepreting the rules or it won't work.

Yeah, this is ture of tother games, but probably moreso with HQ. RQ, D&D, etc. all have rules that in part protect the players from the GM. If you read up how to shoot someone with an arrow, or fight with a sword, or how implaes work, it is consisitent form game sesion to game session, and usualy from camapign to campaign.

In HQ though, just how any of these things work can vary from GM to GM and even from encounter to encounter.

Even the mythic stuff isn't a relaible description, as there any many differt myths and ways of telling the same myth.

 

[burdock]

Good lord! Its just sunk in that it has been suggested that people have interpreted HQ in a way which allows for the direct use of "Cute Smile" against a "sword attack"!!!!! That would indeed be ridiculous!!! You'd have to be silly to interpret it that way

 

[atgxtg]

Good lord! Its just sunk in that it has been suggested that people have interpreted HQ in a way which allows for the direct use of "Cute Smile" against a "sword attack"!!!!! That would indeed be ridiculous!!! You'd have to be silly to interpret it that way

"I win!"

 

[burdock]

atgtx wrote

"I win!"

Nah.....I'm bumping up with a hero point

 

[homerjsinnott]

Thanks Simon, that was useful and gives me a little more respect for the system. Couldn't they use it to get them to stop attacking or attack someone else or get them so mad they said or did something stupid?

Yes, it was a good example of what can happen in HQ. It would be rare, but the rules do support it.

If someone is overmatched in HQ, the bid really only determines how long it takes for them to be defeated. If you are using Spear 17 and the other guy has Greataxe 17W3 you could desparate bid you socks off. Barring some hHero Points and a series of "one in 400 chance" rolls, you are toaste.

That definitely is a contest that I would never waste time setting up as an extended contest. Roll once, get it over with, and move on.

I was wondering why not give the asymetrical contest a chance, isnt that one of the things RQ allowed for? And why not give the less skilled a chance to extend there lives a little longer perhaps for a death (to be) speech?

I wrote the response. I'm not sure why you think I wouldn't give a contest, like Simon mentions, a chance. That isn't what I was talking about. I was just stating that I wouldn't bother setting up an extended contest for a straight up fight involving 17 vs. 17W3. (Note that I stated before that I don't run very many extended contests when I run HQ.) Choosing an extended contest vs. simple contest has nothing to do with extending the character's life or getting a chance for a death speech. In either case, the amount of in-world time the character lived would be the same, and in either case the player could certainly do a death speech. The contest chosen doesn't affect anything beyond how long you want to spend with a particular conflict, in most cases. A simple contest allows you to roll once and then narrate the results. An extended contest allows you to narrate step-by-step through the contest: it just takes more time with the actual dice rolling.

It was about the 17vs 17W3 fight, that's the asymetrical contest I was talking about, that's why I quoted you. But actually (and I think you might agree) some times it would be good to play out this type of contest, ie if the player had the lower score, it at least gives them a little time in the sun before they die, and what if they do win, whats wrong with that? Jammy die rolling is part of being a Hero :wink:

P.S I do think that you would give Simon's contest air-time.

 

[atgxtg]

atgtx wrote

"I win!"

Nah.....I'm bumping up with a hero point

I'mve got a phenomenal augment from my friend, the dragon. (They don't call it the Empire of Wyrm's Associates!)

 

[RMS]

It was about the 17vs 17W3 fight, that's the asymetrical contest I was talking about, that's why I quoted you. But actually (and I think you might agree) some times it would be good to play out this type of contest, ie if the player had the lower score, it at least gives them a little time in the sun before they die, and what if they do win, whats wrong with that? Jammy die rolling is part of being a Hero :wink:

I also said that it's a player's option to call for an extended contest anytime they want. That would hold here too. If it's a PC with a 17 taking on some big, bad NPC with a 17W3, then the player can certain request that it be handled as an extended contest, and I'd grant it. In general, I neither suggest, nor forbid extended contests. It is entirely up to the player(s) when they believe it's appropriate to go that route since this is really going to "slow motion" for the benefit of the player, not the GM.