What parts of RQM do you really like?

[homerjsinnott]

I was saying on the spirit rant thread That RQ (var. Mong) as a system seemed to have little going for it. Well I want people to prove me wrong (no really).


What parts of the the system do people really like, from the smallest to the largest and why?

Knock yourself out.

I await with interest.

 

[weasel_fierce]

character creation is simple and fun

Combat is still serious business but a bit more survivable.

Lots of different magic bits to mix and match

The Glorantha books have generally been enjoyable to read.

Its Runequest

 

[Utgardloki]

Knock yourself out.

I await with interest.

Actually, that's exactly what I like about MRQ. The chance to knock people out. You shoot someone in the head, you've got a good chance of knocking that person out.

(Of course, a PC could throw a Hero Point at you, but then he's out a Hero Point. The point is that getting shot in the head hurts.)

Also, MRQ has good knockback rules (in D20, you have to declare that you are knocking someone back; in MRQ it can happen automatically). In MRQ if you want a saving through against something like dragon fire (or machine gun fire) you have to Dive for Cover. You can't just stand there and expect a saving throw to happen.

I like the way that Size allows for finer distinction among combatants. In D20, a 110 pound woman is in the same Size category as a 200 pound man and a 300 pound gorilla. In Runequest, they have different Sizes, which could make a difference in something like a Brute Force test.

(Of course, that requires a house rule that an Athletics roll will only go so far in making up for a size and strength deficit. The 110 pound woman could still throw the 300 pound man around if she has enough strength and rolls well on Brute Force. Not much of a chance with the gorilla though, unless she has some way of getting her strength well above her racial maximum.)

I've mentioned that I was working on my own role playing game for modern adventures but when MRQ came out, I saw it had a few features I was planning to implement, so I switched over to work on a Runequest Modern project. I think by the time I get a chance to get everything in place, I'll have a very good system.

 

[frogspawner]

Hmm, tricky one. Here goes (but actually from largest to smallest)...

1) Improvement/Hero points. Rewards for good roleplaying were a tragic omission from RQ2/3. (This is the big one, by far).

2) Criticals/Precise Attacks. Separating 'Ignore Armour' (old-style criticals)from 'Extra Damage' (old-style specials) makes combat more interesting and more survivable, though still not too safe.

3) Cult Spells. Limited availability of types of spells adds greatly to the flavour. (I know this was in RQ3, but it didn't seem to be commonly used).

4) Rune Questing. Runes as physical items to quest for, allowing the game to live up to it's name, is cute. (Keep 'em very rare, though!)

5) Initiative Rolls. The old strike ranks system was overly predictable, not reflecting the messiness and confusion (I imagine) in real combat.

I like these ideas a lot. The implementation of them, though... well, I don't want to be negative, so I'd better stop now.

 

[The King]

I like the way skills are handled. A PC developp as the player wish (i.e. no class). Moreover, this skill system allow for a lot more role-playing where you can roll dices for other things than fights and searching for secret doors.

When you have a powerful PC (everything being relative of course), it means you developped it as you wanted and its attributes are not just the result and an automatic level range.

Then even if your PC has a lot of experience he still has the same HP. This means that to survive he has to use his mind too and not the sheer power of weapon and magic.

 

[GoingDown]

I like most:

Skill vs. skill. I really never liked opposed rolls table, new method works much more easier for me.

Rune and Sorcery magics. Now they work, and I didn't like the fact that every farmer had bladesharp or similar in RQ3. Now they only have some common magic which right.

Combat. It is lot simpler and quicker, good bye strike rank counting. Actually that was one thing we were house-ruling out from RQ3.

 

[GianniVacca]

Me-- I still prefer RQ2. What I like in MRQ is the fact that it is set in Second Age Glorantha and that you can play a God Learner or a wyrmfriend. The source books are great; the rule books less so.

 

[gamesmeister]

I like the new combat system.
I like the Divine Magic system when applied to Initiates.
I really like the new Spirit Magic system.
Runes are cool.
I like the Enchanting system.
Most of all, I love the fact that I've got a stack of new RQ material in front of me, and bunch of people online who want to talk about it.

On the down side, I also feel the need to house rule most of the above in one way or another. I think that there lots of great ideas within MRQ, but some of the implementation of those ideas has not always been so good...the devil really is in the detail.

 

[Licheking]

The thing i like best is that it is a Runequest that my players don't know. I could never run RQ before because everyone of my players knew more about the world than i did, not a good position for a gM. Now though its all new. The books are great, well illustrated and adding loads of stuff for me to play with and vex my players with.

I love the idea of runes being physical things, Love sorcery and divine magic as well as Shamanism. The whole system for me works, this represents my Mid-Fantasy game, where d20 is high and the Riddle of Steel is Low.

 

[Banesfinger]

As a game system, Runequest (various editions) is quite different from many other RPGs:

- Classless: hate classes and being forced into decisions - e.g., most systems make it more difficult/impossible to learn skills outside of your class.

- Level-less: hated the abstract notion of levels - e.g., gee he is a level-5 fighter so he can do this & that. Levesl are a mechanic that do not help roleplaying / immersion into the game.

- No XP: I like the removal of experience points (XP). Most games use this silly, dated mechanic. Kill one more goblin and suddenly all your abilities/skills increase *ding*.
I feel the "learn-by-using-the-skill" system of RQ is great.

- No huge power ramp: Many games continue to give you more and more Hit Points or Damage potential (e.g. more powerful spells) in order to keep the game challenging at high levels. However, this begins to get silly at extreme levels as characters can fall 500-feet over a cliff or have 60 arrows sticking out of their chest, and still walk away.

Things I would like to see in this game (other systems have bits & peices of these):

- Better hit, better damage: some systems (e.g., HARP/Rolemaster) use a table, and damage increases as your to-hit roll increases. Some systems have elaborate critical hit tables (e.g., WarHammer RPG, HARP, etc). These add a nice flavour to the game.

 

[RMS]

- Better hit, better damage: some systems (e.g., HARP/Rolemaster) use a table, and damage increases as your to-hit roll increases. Some systems have elaborate critical hit tables (e.g., WarHammer RPG, HARP, etc). These add a nice flavour to the game.

You could import the old RQ2/3 critical and/or special hit mechanics pretty easily into MRQ. Some of those are rolled up into the tactical options of MRQ, but some of them don't exist anymore and could easily be added. In RQ2, slashing weapons did maximum damage on a special success (20% of skill), crushing did maximum strength bonus on the same type of hit, and impaling weapons...impaled (max damage + rolled damage + stuck in the victim and impeding them - still around). A critical bypassed armor and did the special damage at the same time. RQ3 was a bit different, but worked in a similar manner.

 

[iamtim]

I don't have a lot to add here...

I greatly prefer opposed checks to the resistance table. But more than that, I am overjoyed that it was released under the OGL.

 

[weasel_fierce]

I like the resistance table, but the two doesnt have anything to do with each other.

Resistance was, and still can be, used when two stats are opposing each other, or for tasks that are not dependent on skill, but raw ability.

 

[frogspawner]

- Better hit, better damage: some systems (e.g., HARP/Rolemaster) use a table, and damage increases as your to-hit roll increases. Some systems have elaborate critical hit tables (e.g., WarHammer RPG, HARP, etc). These add a nice flavour to the game.

You could import the old RQ2/3 critical and/or special hit mechanics...

Alternatively, you could roll on your preferred critical hit tables when someone suffers a significant wound (Serious/Major in MRQ?). Not to inflict the wound, or multiply it's damage, but just to describe it. All the 'nice' flavour, but without warping the underlying combat system or making it even deadlier.

PS: I think RQ has had the "Better hit, better damage" idea since the earliest days...

 

[Flaming Gummi Ork]

I think the thing I like the most about Rune Quest is the lethality. I have Played D&D for the better part of 24 years. There is a certain point where the players just really have no concern about death. It happened rarely and resurrection was easy to come by. My players tactics have already changed to a more cautious bent and they are more willing to flee a battle if it looks like they can't handle the challenge. Makes it easier to design challenges where that is the primary purpose.

I also love that it is class less. You can put your advancements where ever you would like your character to develope.

 

[Trifletraxor]

What I like about MRQ:

- They produce new stuff!
- Fatigue levels and opposed rolls are a good idea.
- Simplified character generation.
- Grumpy overworked editors to ban me once in a while.
- And did I mention, they produce new stuff?

SGL.

 

[The King]

I love to behead my foes. :shock:

Which I only can with a Vorpal in D&D.

 

[iamtim]

I like the resistance table, but the two doesnt have anything to do with each other.

Resistance was, and still can be, used when two stats are opposing each other, or for tasks that are not dependent on skill, but raw ability.

I assume you were referring to my comment?

If so, then I ask... why? I mentioned that I don't like the resistance table, why would I want to keep using the resistance table when I can do the same thing with opposed rollls?

If you weren't referring to my comment, well, then... move along, nothing to see here.

 

[CharlieMonster]

Like about it, LIKE ABOUT IT!?! Bah this doesn't sound like an RQ Forum thread! Mnaaah! :evil:

Only Kidding,

Character Generation is quick & easy (RQ3 was a total ball-ache!) and it is way easy to create experienced chracters too.

Combat rocks and I have found that the bits I worried about while reading turned out in practice minor or non-issues.

MkII sorcery is great, while not potentially as powerful as RQ3 it is on the whole far more practical from the get-go and user friendly.

Runes, Legendary Abilities and Hero Points all add nicely to the whole and gives players nice things to aim for which develop the character as much as the stats.

Giving Improvement rolls for Roleplaying is a nice (long overdue) touch although I think progression is a tad slow.

The Systems flexibility as a whole. You can drop the core rules into pretty much any setting with a minimum of kerfuffle.

While there are a few exceptions, by and large the artwork is better than previous editions (the last few RQ3 Rennaisance release notwithstanding). More importantly as far as I can tell Dave Dobsky is not involved in the art at all!!!

DBCs writing for Glorantha & Lankhmar (oops)

 

[homerjsinnott]

Character Generation is quick & easy (RQ3 was a total ball-ache!) and it is way easy to create experienced chracters too.

I thought that the RQ3 system was a bit complex but with a bit of experience could be done in 10mins+ player choice times. (which with any system depended on the player, I had a player who took days no matter what the system).

The Systems flexibility as a whole. You can drop the core rules into pretty much any setting with a minimum of kerfuffle.

???

While there are a few exceptions, by and large the artwork is better than previous editions (the last few RQ3 Rennaisance release notwithstanding). More importantly as far as I can tell Dave Dobsky is not involved in the art at all!!!

I liked Dobsky's work and it was anything but bog standard fantasy snouts,,,,, Uhhhhhhh I mean Art. But, y'know.

DBCs writing for Glorantha & Lankhmar (oops)

Out Of Prints?