Which versions of RQ do you play?
- Thread starter Uncruliar
- Start date
Yes, RQ 3. I have not played RQ 2, so I don't know the rules of it. The differences to RQ 3 are:
- No general HP, only hit locations.
- No fatigue point system (and therefore the spells and monsters relying on them are gone), but a replacement with fatigue levels.
- Common magic is pretty much the old Combat magic. Effectivity of Sorcery and Divine magic are now defined by the casting skill level of the user, not his free INT or POW. All spells a divine caster now knows have the same strength (skill divided by 10, rounded up...someone with 4 divine spells and skill 55 casts them all at intensity 6), and the 2:1 advantage from RQ 3 is gone.
- You don't sacrifice POW or stats for enchanting stuff or gaining divine magic. For enchanting you use permanent MP now, and for divine magic you reserve a pool of POW (so you have less MP) to determine the number of spells you can learn.
- You don't measure magic attacks MP vs MP any more, but against the skills Persistence, Resilience and Evade.
- Combat is totally different, because each character has a number of combat actions (determined by INT and DEX, the higher the more actions), which can be used to attack and defend, instead of attack/defense.
- Weapons have reach and size, which define who can parry what and attack distance.
That are the things I can think offhand. The monster statistics don't look much different, except they have no fatigue anymore, and combat actions, reach and weapon size have been added.
- No general HP, only hit locations.
- No fatigue point system (and therefore the spells and monsters relying on them are gone), but a replacement with fatigue levels.
- Common magic is pretty much the old Combat magic. Effectivity of Sorcery and Divine magic are now defined by the casting skill level of the user, not his free INT or POW. All spells a divine caster now knows have the same strength (skill divided by 10, rounded up...someone with 4 divine spells and skill 55 casts them all at intensity 6), and the 2:1 advantage from RQ 3 is gone.
- You don't sacrifice POW or stats for enchanting stuff or gaining divine magic. For enchanting you use permanent MP now, and for divine magic you reserve a pool of POW (so you have less MP) to determine the number of spells you can learn.
- You don't measure magic attacks MP vs MP any more, but against the skills Persistence, Resilience and Evade.
- Combat is totally different, because each character has a number of combat actions (determined by INT and DEX, the higher the more actions), which can be used to attack and defend, instead of attack/defense.
- Weapons have reach and size, which define who can parry what and attack distance.
That are the things I can think offhand. The monster statistics don't look much different, except they have no fatigue anymore, and combat actions, reach and weapon size have been added.
sdavies2720
Mongoose
I have a long-running campaign started in RQ1, converted to RQ3, thenBRP, and now MRQ2.
In general, I agree with Vatras' comments. In many ways, MRQ2 has recaptured the feel of RQ3 that MRQ1 lost.
One quibble, I think that Combat in MRQ2 is not TOTALLY different from RQ3, but it IS different. The basic attack-parry mechanic is still there. Armor still absorbs damage. What has changed is who goes first, the introduction of Combat Actions to determine how many actions per round each character gets, and the introduction of Combat Maneuvres to give more tactical options as the result of critical hits or other strong successes.
There are lots of little changes: No Special Results, only Critical Results which are now 1/10 of skill rather than 1/20th. Fewer fumbles. No splitting of attacks over 100%. Skills changed a bit, consolidated a bit. No categories of skills (e.g. Communication). Combat movement is more abstract than before. Character backgrounds are more fully drawn.
Magic has been nicely cleaned up, but generally requires fewer skills to be successful.
Try it, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Steve
In general, I agree with Vatras' comments. In many ways, MRQ2 has recaptured the feel of RQ3 that MRQ1 lost.
One quibble, I think that Combat in MRQ2 is not TOTALLY different from RQ3, but it IS different. The basic attack-parry mechanic is still there. Armor still absorbs damage. What has changed is who goes first, the introduction of Combat Actions to determine how many actions per round each character gets, and the introduction of Combat Maneuvres to give more tactical options as the result of critical hits or other strong successes.
There are lots of little changes: No Special Results, only Critical Results which are now 1/10 of skill rather than 1/20th. Fewer fumbles. No splitting of attacks over 100%. Skills changed a bit, consolidated a bit. No categories of skills (e.g. Communication). Combat movement is more abstract than before. Character backgrounds are more fully drawn.
Magic has been nicely cleaned up, but generally requires fewer skills to be successful.
Try it, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Steve
I have been GM'ing one campaign, which started with RQ3, then converted to MRQ, and finally to MRQ2.
Each system was working pretty well, I liked quite a lot first Mongoose Runequest already, and the current edition is superb.
Also I am playing on campaign, which started with MRQ1, and will be converted to MRQ2 pretty within next session.
Each system was working pretty well, I liked quite a lot first Mongoose Runequest already, and the current edition is superb.
Also I am playing on campaign, which started with MRQ1, and will be converted to MRQ2 pretty within next session.
Lord High Munchkin
Mongoose
I have played all versions of RuneQuest (bar 'Slayers').
I have a nostalgic soft-spot for RQ1, and to a lesser extent RQ2, but I especially liked RQ3.
That said, MRQII is pretty good... once a few more books come out it might even dethrone RQ3.
I have a nostalgic soft-spot for RQ1, and to a lesser extent RQ2, but I especially liked RQ3.
That said, MRQII is pretty good... once a few more books come out it might even dethrone RQ3.
K Peterson
Banded Mongoose
I've gamed with RQ3, and an RQ3/BRP hybrid. I'm looking forward to running MRQ2 in the near future.
I started with RQ2 (and still know a group who plays it), and have played RQ3 as well as most other BRP variants (inluding Ringworld and ElfQuest even).
I played MRQ1 by the book and also have a heavily modified version I was working on based on the SRD that I was waiting for the MRQ2 SRD to finish up.
Running my first MRQ2 game now online.
They are all good and I can happily play any of them, each system has it's own strengths and I can't say I like any one best. MRQ2 is the most radically different, mostly in the combat, which seems like one of its strengths.
The MRQ2 Core is very complete and all you need to try the game (unlike MRQ1). It is definitely worth a try.
I played MRQ1 by the book and also have a heavily modified version I was working on based on the SRD that I was waiting for the MRQ2 SRD to finish up.
Running my first MRQ2 game now online.
They are all good and I can happily play any of them, each system has it's own strengths and I can't say I like any one best. MRQ2 is the most radically different, mostly in the combat, which seems like one of its strengths.
The MRQ2 Core is very complete and all you need to try the game (unlike MRQ1). It is definitely worth a try.
