This is a great game system.

Slade

Mongoose
Hi, after a long time being a lurker I decided to come out of the shadows to say how impressed I am with this gaming system.

I have been running games since 1990 using D&D (1st-3.5), D20 (variants), True20, Blue Rose, Thieves World, Black Company, and flirted with BRP etc. I found all of those systems lacking. Let me explain what sold me on RQ 2.

1. Character creation: most gaming systems the characters are worried about their stats, and they rightfully should, the difference between a 13 STR and an 18/99 STR (old D&D) was a huge disparity in damage and hit ability for someone who wanted to be a good melee fighter. MRQ 2 cleans up the stat problem by eliminating the need for super high ability scores to be a competent character (i.e a low CON can be offset by a high SIZ for HP, STR and SIZ for damage).

2. No classes, I know I am preaching to the choir on this board, but for a player who is stuck in one path (fighter or wizard) the idea and ability to build the character you what to play is huge, and liberating. It can also be a hard idea to grasp for a player who has been used to playing one type of class or suffering from XP lag of multi-classing.

3. Training to raise a skill or ability score is very realistic and eliminates the need to constantly battle everything that moves. MRQ also cuts down on hack and slash games (need to kill one more ogre for XP to make 5th level) by making combat deadly again. This also forces a PC to interact with the local populace and helps with the story line.

4. Magic (especially sorcery) allows a caster to mimic almost any spell from another system with just the basic spells provided (no need for multiple spells doing the same damage but different effects, how many spells do you need to really destroy something?). I happened to love the Black Company books by Glen Cook, this system almost mimics what those sorcerers could do in the stories (want to cast a spell that causes glowing worms eat an enemy? Just combine phantom (sense) and wrack, almost any display of destruction can be combined with these simple spells in the rule book). Form Set (flesh) to turn targets boneless blobs is nasty. That knight attacking you in full plate, a well cast Enlarge (Size) will make him explode out of his armor. Then look at possibilities with spirit magic; there are so many that each NPC battle can be something new and fresh (elementals bound to weapons then manifesting their powers in with an attack can be disgusting). The divine magic progression with cult rank is superb and well explained; playing a priest in a religion makes sense with the duties and responsibilities laid out.

5. But my favorite part of MRQ 2 is that a well aimed blow to the head by shovel wielding peasant can drop even the most experienced adventurer. This means that a PC with a weapon skill of 200+ can still be scared by a lowly kobold, and a GM can continue to use some of the best ionic monsters throughout an entire campaign.


I am amazed at the detail put into this game. Thank you.

John
 
Slade said:
5. But my favorite part of MRQ 2 is that a well aimed blow to the head by shovel wielding peasant can drop even the most experienced adventurer. This means that a PC with a weapon skill of 200+ can still be scared by a lowly kobold, and a GM can continue to use some of the best ionic monsters throughout an entire campaign.

Amen.

Although, as a player this can be frustrating ("I just got knocked out by a peasant with a shovel? But I'm in full plate with a hoplite shield!!!"), but it is realistic. The game mechanics capture the "Anything can happen" nature of reality. And any player outnumbered more than 2 to 1 is in serious trouble. Glad you like the system! Those are some big names you listed as "befores," can't wait to hear some of your experiences with MRQ2. Welcome to the boards!
 
I am coming mainly from older Runequest versions (have been playing mainly with old RQ3, Mongoose Runequest, but also little bit MERP, new BRP and some others). I also totally love some new aspects of new Runequest II, like character creation with backgrounds.

It seems to be best D100 gaming system for me ever. Let's see how it turns on in longer run.

By the way, even experienced warrior should worry about being outnumbered - it can end up badly for him pretty quickly.
 
Apart from one campaign using HeroQuest rules, for all my Gloranthan game since the mid-90s I have used the Elric game system (rules light BRP) with RQ3 magic. It's taken almost two decades for something better to come along and I'm realy charged up about it.

Simon Hibbs
 
I am used to RQ 3, with some tossed in stuff from Stormbringer (mostly demon magic for NPCs), which still holds the Nr. 1 place in my heart when it comes to game systems. I needed to house rule a few things (nothing major, though...adapting to my players tastes mostly), but it works very well.

I never got to use more than about a third of the monsters, and it is a big difference if giants, dragons or other big stuff stays a threat (becoming less deadly over time of course, but not losing the challenge completely). It is fun to find out what you can do with the one page of sorcery spells, too...it's amazing what players will think of, if they have limited magic, and what they will do to seize power (in RQ 3 that means sacrificing POW permanently, and sometimes other stats, too).

What makes me a bit wary with MRQ is the combat action concept, since I fear it can be too easily broken. One can assume that a fighter will see to it - point buy system - that he has an average of 13 in INT and DEX, probably a little higher, to get his 3 combat actions. His eye will of course be set to get four, which can probably achieved with a 5 point stat boost spell, and later on five actions. The latter is possible to all who pick up sorcery to boost their stats over time, maybe with some training in addition (starting with 14 allows a 28 by spell, and you need only 25 anyway, unless you are going for six, which requires 31...).
There is no limit for major spellcasters as in RQ 3 to their combat prowess, so the best fighters will probably be mages, shamans or rune priests (those not so much due to the limited choice of spells by cult).

I like the idea about how to handle spells by skill, and the new concept of shamans looks much better than the old one :)
There are in my opinion two problems with the system, though. The first is the power granted by spirit combat to shamans, the second the escalating power of the runepriests/lords, since all their spells have the same strength. Until I got an opportunity to see it on a table, though, I am not sure, how big those really are. Since I am used to sacrifing POW for spells on a point-for-point basis, the large amount of divine magic makes me maybe just uncomfortable from habit :)
 
Vatras said:
...What makes me a bit wary with MRQ is the combat action concept, since I fear it can be too easily broken. One can assume that a fighter will see to it - point buy system - that he has an average of 13 in INT and DEX, probably a little higher, to get his 3 combat actions. His eye will of course be set to get four, which can probably achieved with a 5 point stat boost spell, and later on five actions. The latter is possible to all who pick up sorcery to boost their stats over time, maybe with some training in addition (starting with 14 allows a 28 by spell, and you need only 25 anyway, unless you are going for six, which requires 31...).
I converted my characters a week ago: As you say, everyone with an interest in fighting had 3 base CAs, plus another for their shield or off-hand weapon. So 4 was the starting norm.

That extra CA is a huge advantage in a fight -- essentially giving an automatic Combat Maneuvre. It's going to take a little work to figure out how best to challenge them.

Steve
 
That extra CA is a huge advantage in a fight -- essentially giving an automatic Combat Maneuvre. It's going to take a little work to figure out how best to challenge them.

The best way is judicious use of CMs when you achieve them. Knock that 4CA fighter's sword out of his hand (or break it) and he loses a CA. If you get the option, Pin his weapon to let a companion wade-in. When you can outnumber a foe, do so: you'll find those CAs get burned pretty quickly.

The secret is not to rely on the old staple of damaging hit points directly. Confusing, disabling and disarming your foe can probably afford you more of an advantage than going for an Impale or Chosen Location. Much depends on the relative skills of the combatants, and speed. Acting quickly and precisely can prove to be challenge for a foe with more CA but a slower SR.
 
Any manuever that forces an opponent to burn CAs can snowball into a victory. Trips are excellent as most evade skills are lower than weapon skills (which are used to oppose disarms).

Also, if characters are trying to cast magic at the top of a round (especially if they have the 1st acting SR) they can quickly find themselves out of CAs and open to a free attack at the end of the round. I've seen quite a few beneficial spells turn into defeats before they can even be put to use!
 
Loz said:
That extra CA is a huge advantage in a fight -- essentially giving an automatic Combat Maneuvre. It's going to take a little work to figure out how best to challenge them.
The best way is judicious use of CMs when you achieve them. Knock that 4CA fighter's sword out of his hand (or break it) and he loses a CA. If you get the option, Pin his weapon to let a companion wade-in. When you can outnumber a foe, do so: you'll find those CAs get burned pretty quickly.

The secret is not to rely on the old staple of damaging hit points directly. Confusing, disabling and disarming your foe can probably afford you more of an advantage than going for an Impale or Chosen Location. Much depends on the relative skills of the combatants, and speed. Acting quickly and precisely can prove to be challenge for a foe with more CA but a slower SR.
ThatGuy said:
Any manuever that forces an opponent to burn CAs can snowball into a victory. Trips are excellent as most evade skills are lower than weapon skills (which are used to oppose disarms).
Those are good thoughts. I haven't focused on the other combat maneuvres, but I will before running next time.

Outnumbering is always a challenge for me as GM. The campaign has been going for a long time and the players have good sense about avoiding those situations. And frankly, as a GM I'm loathe to run a combat with more monsters than players.

(confesson time)I've never really found a good system to track lots of combatants (I usually have 6-8 players, so to outnumber in any meaningful way, I'm running 10 or so opponents): Hit points in multiple locations, CAs left in the melee round, movement left in the melee round, spell durations, etc. etc. There are actually a lot of moving stats for a GM to track. Anyone have a good system for recording everything?

Steve
 
sdavies2720 said:
There are actually a lot of moving stats for a GM to track. Anyone have a good system for recording everything?

Not really, I'm afraid. I have run some pretty big fights under RQII (4 PCs, 20 odd allied NPCs and 40-60 enemy NPCs) and about the best you can do is good paperwork before hand and try and set it up so there's waves of things going on. On the plus side, most players won't spot technical errors unless their PC is in the middle of it so it doesn't have to be perfect, just convincing.

For masses of NPCs I mark CAs in pencil as they occur and write the initials of any PC they're in combat with above them.
 
4 PCs, 20 odd allied NPCs and 40-60 enemy NPCs
With so many moving parts, I doubt any systems would work. I mean, many wargames have less units than that.
On the other hand, we all know how cool adventures are when they end in a big rumble :p :p
 
sdavies2720 said:
There are actually a lot of moving stats for a GM to track. Anyone have a good system for recording everything?

Steve

In other systems I have used a combat unit template for mass combat. Basically it uses a character sheet with the average of all the combatant's skills then uses a modifier for the leader's skills (you could use the leaders Lore tactics crit modifier as a bonus to attacks, SR, and CA's for the unit). Track damage using the total HP method, each HP in damage is a % of the unit taken out of the fight, a serious wound would cause the unit to make a moral check (persistence) to see if they disband or surrender, a major wound would mean victory for the other side. Instead of normal CMs use something special like terrain advantages or intimidation checks.
 
Lol. Thanks! At least it's not just me.

Yeah, I put together paperwork ahead, I do shortcuts, the players make allowances... I was just wondering if I was missing something obvious. In the middle of a big combat, the paperwork makes me feel like I'm in an audit :shock:

Steve
 
I've found that systems which lean more towards lethal combats (most GURP's, Role/Spacemaster, non-superheroic HeroSystem et. al.) are the ones that tend to have the longest combats; especially with large numbers of particpants.

Love them or hate them, generic hit point systems are simple and fast. The more you move away from that, the longer combats tend to take.

There's nothing inherently wrong with a combat system being slower or faster than others, or a system being crunchier or fluffier than others, it's just they way it is and it comes down to a matter of preference.

jolt
 
Personally, I like the cinematic feel of MRQ2 combat. It makes the imagination piece very lively, and yet rooted directly in game mechanics. Cool 8)
 
ThatGuy said:
Personally, I like the cinematic feel of MRQ2 combat. It makes the imagination piece very lively, and yet rooted directly in game mechanics. Cool 8)

That's definitely reflected in our game. One of my players has a character that fights in the florentine style with a rapier and a left handed dagger, and is one part Errol Flynn and two parts Inigo Montoya - he's having the time of his life with all the CAs flying around.

Interestingly, there has been a (seemingly unconscious) shift from simply battering opponents until they're dead to disarming, stunning etc which has made combat more interesting for all concerned and generally less dangerous. I've been rewarding this by having antagonists that survive provide interesting clues, information tidbits, hints etc which seems more rewarding than sharing out bloodstained moneybags and bits of armour, weapons etc

We're having a blast... :lol:
 
Its pretty fair to say that Inigo Montoya is a favourite character of mine and Pete's, and his duel with Wesley/Dread Pirate Roberts in 'Princess Bride' one of the all-time great sword-fights.

It wasn't far from either of our minds when putting all this together.

'Hello. I am Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.'

Bloody classic... :D
 
Loz said:
Its pretty fair to say that Inigo Montoya is a favourite character of mine and Pete's, and his duel with Wesley/Dread Pirate Roberts in 'Princess Bride' one of the all-time great sword-fights.

It wasn't far from either of our minds when putting all this together.

'Hello. I am Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.'

Bloody classic... :D

"No more rhymes now- and I mean it!"

"Anybody want a peanut?"

One of the funniest lines in a movie EVER
 
Loz said:
Its pretty fair to say that Inigo Montoya is a favourite character of mine and Pete's, and his duel with Wesley/Dread Pirate Roberts in 'Princess Bride' one of the all-time great sword-fights.
I'm totaly agree ! I've played Inigo Montoya as PC in a french RPG and it was very fun ! :lol:

I want to create the CM "I am not lefthanded" ! :D
 
Back
Top