Which is your Favourite Edition of RuneQuest . . . . . .

[WildHealer]

When I look at the RQ core rulebook I see "Open BRPalike System Core Rulebook", more than I see the word "RuneQuest", and I think if people thought of it like that it might go down a lot better amongst long-term players.

With the caveat about the dodgy rules which have already been identified (Halving, crits, char rolls, etc) & which have clearly caused great irritation, I'd agree wholeheartedly there. However, given the fact that Mongoose clearly wanted the association with previous editions of RQ (& by association Glorantha) rather than the "Open BRP-a-like" tag, it might have posed fewer probs to have a simultaneous release of a generic core rules book (inc companion), plus a Gloranthan core rules book (ie magic, monsters, cults, etc). Certainly RQ3 got some way round this with by covering spirit magic & divine magic in the core rules and providing an Introduction to Glorantha book.

As has been said on these boards before, if you call it "RuneQuest", people will judge it as such - Mongoose have opted for a bar set very high indeed!

 

[t-tauri]

RQ2 all the way. The GW versions are almost verbatim reprints of the then current Chaosium/AH output, though the GW RQ3 was in some respects edited for maximum confusion.

I'm really not liking MRQ at the moment-I need to read the Companion and the Glorantha stuff before I reach a final decision but at the moment the rules are too full of holes and annoyances that I'm finding are grating on me.

 

[atgxtg]

When I look at the RQ core rulebook I see "Open BRPalike System Core Rulebook", more than I see the word "RuneQuest", and I think if people thought of it like that it might go down a lot better amongst long-term players.

Now if I posted something like that, I'd have been inundated by counterposts.
I agree with you, and get the same sort of feeling.

I certainly would not have been as bothered by MRQ if it were ""Open BRPalike System Core Rulebook".

 

[Rurik]

When I look at the RQ core rulebook I see "Open BRPalike System Core Rulebook", more than I see the word "RuneQuest", and I think if people thought of it like that it might go down a lot better amongst long-term players.

Now if I posted something like that, I'd have been inundated by counterposts.
I agree with you, and get the same sort of feeling.

I certainly would not have been as bothered by MRQ if it were ""Open BRPalike System Core Rulebook".

Very well then....

Hey, Thomason, why should they have to call it BRP like Core Rulebook!?!?

They bought the RQ License they so it IS RQ. All old books should be burned!

There, hows that?

 

[mthomason]

You misunderstand me...

I've been *wanting* an open BRP derivative for years. Thats why I want RQ. Thats what I see when I pick the book up. I see the book I've been waiting for for years.

I wasn't looking for "The Glorantha RPG", which is what most people appear to associate with the name RuneQuest.

I want a version of BRP I can use in games, write for, and see lots of other people writing for.

I've got it. I'm happy

I certainly don't think they should have to change the name. I do think the use of the name confused a lot of fans of previous RQs.

I'm luckier than most former RQ players are - I knew this book wasn't a single-volume Glorantha RPG. Some, however, thought it would be.

For the record I love RuneQuest. This book is RuneQuest. All others are no longer in publication and as I never saw them, have no comment on them

 

[atgxtg]

Very well then....

Hey, Thomason, why should they have to call it BRP like Core Rulebook!?!?

They bought the RQ License they so it IS RQ. All old books should be burned!

There, hows that?

*Sigh*, and I've read that Trollkin aren't that much of a threat anymore.

 

[AKAramis]

*Sigh*, and I've read that Trollkin aren't that much of a threat anymore.

Only if the GM has trollkin being no more than automatons. Int 7-15 is the range (13+ only for the experienced).

Even int 7 (non-fixed), while thickwitted, is capable of of using tactics. Pull him down. Sick him with numbers. Grapple him, then strip him. Then eat him alive.

 

[Darran]

There is a poll like this on RPGnet at the moment.

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=282442

Worth taking a look?

 

[burdock]

AKaramis wrote

Only if the GM has trollkin being no more than automatons

And if the GM sillilily doesn't match the NPC trolkin to the abilities of the PCs (an incontravertible point I have made before but which seems to have been strangely bypassed)

 

[AKAramis]

There is a poll like this on RPGnet at the moment.
Worth taking a look?

If it's on RPGNet, probably not!

 

[Gnarsh]

RQ-3 is the version I gamed with for a decade (both as a player and a GM), and I only got my hands on RQ-2 material later.

I must say I hope I'd had the RQ-2 books earlier on. Talking about battle magic POW (as opposed to MP) is clumsy, and spiritual destruction is too easy, but I just love how everything in the rules support Glorantha gaming.

RQ worked good when tailored for Glorantha, as opposed to generic fantasy. Stormbringer is tailored for it's genre, as is CoC, Elfquest and Nephilim... so should Rune Quest.

Hah. Almost the exact opposite experience for me. We started playing in RQ1/2 (btw, about the only difference between the two was that RQ2 included the errata and supplimental rules and had a color cover). So we already had that "ties into Glorantha" thing established firmly in our game when RQ3 came out. For us, it was just adopting the new game rules in RQ3 while keeping all the campaign game game world stuff from RQ2.

That's why I put RQ3 down as my choice. For me, I've always played RQ3 with the full RQ2 Glorantha stuff in it, and IMO RQ3 has a much broader and in many ways better thought out ruleset then RQ2 had (much more flexibility and potential, especially if you kept certain rules from RQ2 in place).

The only major changes we made to the rules (changes as opposed to additions!) was in the sorcery section. That was pretty borked up from day one in RQ3. Good concept. Decent balance. Some of the rules were just a bit ... wonky (*cough* multispell *cough*). Easy enough to fix and make workable in our game though...

Haven't officially "played" MRQ yet. I have a feeling I'd need to do a fair bit of reworking on the combat system though. I like the whole "action ranks" idea. Just don't agree with some of the specific rules contained within it. We'll see how it works out though.

 

[wen]

if i could change my vote i would now vote MRQ now seeing the SRD rules VERY WELL DONE in the RULES piss poor SRD though.

 

[homerjsinnott]

if i could change my vote i would now vote MRQ now seeing the SRD rules VERY WELL DONE in the RULES piss poor SRD though.

Sorry I don't understand.

SRD?

 

[atgxtg]

if i could change my vote i would now vote MRQ now seeing the SRD rules VERY WELL DONE in the RULES piss poor SRD though.

Sorry I don't understand.

SRD?

Check it out at: http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=20623

 

[Darran]

There is a poll like this on RPGnet at the moment.
Worth taking a look?

If it's on RPGNet, probably not!

Don't like RPGnet or something? :?:

 

[wen]

It is actually easier just to use this address to get the SRD.

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/rqsrd.zip

 

[wartorn]

Ahem, to paraphrase an eailer statment. We are talking the rules, not the source books.

SO even in the Gloranthan 2nd Age book rocks, that doesn't make the MRQ core book a better rule book, just a rule book with a good supplement.

Heck, if we counted supplements, then RQ2 would walk away with the win.

Thanks but,

"Simple, which Edition of RuneQuest do you prefer!"

 

[zanshin]

atgxtg wrote:

Ahem, to paraphrase an eailer statment. We are talking the rules, not the source books.

SO even in the Gloranthan 2nd Age book rocks, that doesn't make the MRQ core book a better rule book, just a rule book with a good supplement.

Heck, if we counted supplements, then RQ2 would walk away with the win.

Thanks but,

"Simple, which Edition of RuneQuest do you prefer!"

Run along now.

Mmm , both patronising and misses the point of what atgxtg actually was saying - which was the only meaningful comparison at this point is rulebooks. Not nice

 

[Vadrus]

I'm quite surprised the survey is currently showing 60% of respondents preferred the previous editions to MRQ.


Vadrus

 

[mthomason]

I'm quite surprised the survey is currently showing 60% of respondents preferred the previous editions to MRQ.
Vadrus

I'm not, really. The majority of RQ players are this point are going to be those who played previous versions, as there's no real game material for RQ newbies to get into the game with. I can't imagine it'll really take off with that many people outside of the existing RQ crowd until at least the Glorantha books are out, and even more once other settings become available.

Actually, I'm surprised it's *only* 60% (unless thats what you meant in the first place)