Why do you play runequest ?

[weasel_fierce]

lots of babbling about why this or that sucks, not enough talk about why it rawks.

So to you, why does runequest (ANY edition) rawk, why do you play it ?

And ideally, do you have any fun or memorable moments from games ?


Share the joy and the rawk

 

[Utgardloki]

Runequest Modern

Runequest has a number of features that I was looking for in a modern role playing game:

* The ability to threaten any normal character with a shot to the head,

* The ability to knock opponents back in combat,

* Size implemented with enough granularity to represent sexual differences, so that men could be men and women could be women. (Not that a large, strong female character is impossible, but most female PCs and combatant NPCs should be emphasizing their specific advantages such as agility rather than being "tanks in drag.")

Runequest Iron Kingdoms

One of my players wants to play in the Iron Kingdoms, but I am a little tired of the same old thing. So I thought that converting it to Runequest would spice things up:

* Since Runequest does not have a Druid class, every religion has to have druids. (Although I've identified the professions as "druid", "shaman", and "antidruid", depending on the religion in question.)

* Since Runequest does not have classes, no arguments over multiclassed characters like my proposed sorceress/wizard/ranger PC or my proposed necromancer/monk/paladin/ranger/fighter/rogue PC.

* Since Runequest does not have classes, this makes the magical "classes" interesting. Iron Kingdoms already equates bards and sorcerers. Runequest Iron Kingdoms forces a unified theory for bards, sorcerers, wizards, and other arcane spellcasting classes.

* The runes of runequest seem to be a better match for Iron Kingdoms concepts than the class system in D&D. Iron Kingdom fluff makes distinctions among necromancy, conjuration, enchantment, and the other schools of magic, which does not really come through with the D&D rules for specialization. Associating "schools of magic" with runequest "Runes" means that a necromancer would be connected with the "death rune", and other specialists connected with other runes. And yet, Runequest also does not lock people into their chosen runes, i.e., no need for "barred schools of magic".

Moonquest

I recently had a thread considering whether Runequest or Call of Cthulhu would be a better system for running a hard science fiction campaign set on the moon. I am leaning towards Runequest despite CoC's support for technology, for the following reasons:

* Runequest has elaborate "Dive for Cover" rules that look like they'd be better for handling automatic weapons than the traditional automatic weapons rules.

* The specialization rules I worked out for Runequest Modern seem to be better support for advanced skills than the traditional CoC. Since I've already done work for specialization in Runequest Modern, might as well apply it to the Moon.

* Runequest characters have more potential for heroism than Call of Cthulhu characters. I am imagining kind of a James Bond game, so Legendary Abilities could easily come into play.

* Runequest may also be better equiped for handling PCs with genetic enhancements, although I'm not sure how well Call of Cthulhu would handle these.

Summary

In summary, the major advantages of Runequest are the following:

1. Ability to threaten even heroic characters with instant death,

2. Size and knockback rules that support human sexual dimorphism.

3. An alternative to D&D's magic system.

4. Rules and a skill system that is flexible enough to support different settings.

 

[Exubae]

You get a good idea of the capabilites of the character just by seeing the character sheet, his attributes and skill %, with little or no need to reference a million and one tables or books.
(I admit MRQ has clouded this a bit with changes to combat and legendary powers, but its still pretty clean- but they've also stream lined other areas.)

No Levels

No artificial stereo types are enforced - the characters can develop in what ever direction they want.

Risk to life and limb at every turn - forcing your character to think, rather that dumbly throw themselves in to stupid life threatening events.

Glorantha

 

[soltakss]

What you see happens it what happens in the game.

Someone hits me on the head, my head gets hurt.

I want to climb a wall, so I climb. Admittedly Mongoose have destroyed this one with the Athletics and similar skill bundles

Magic is immediate and personal. Magic comes from different sources.

Anyone can learn magic. Anyone can learn any type of magic. (New-Age Gloranthan rubbish notwithstanding)

Characters can progress and can change. They are not limited to a certain character type or class.

It's easy to die. It's easy to come back from the dead.

It's fairly quick and fairly simple to learn and use.

It has Glorantha.

 

[Halfbat]

Generally I prefer RuneQuest because of it's character definition/growth flexiblity and, as mentioned above, the fact that almost anything you can do is there in front of you without reference to much else.

One of the drawbacks for Mongoose, of course, is that several of my players have _not_ bought the rulebooks but have just downloaded the SRD and only printed out a few sections.

...mind you that's another oppurtunity: an A5 collated player reference?

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

I play it for the chicks.

Well, and for runes, for the character creation, because I like percentile systems and I love the way they handle in a game, because I like gritty combat that is hard to get blase' about, because of the settings getting published for it, and because I'm paid to like it.

But mostly, it's the chicks.

 

[Blackyinkin]

Hi All,

I am playing it for a hiatus from Heroquest, of which I am a huge fan. I must admit I love the second age setting, if I had the time I would have converted it to HQ.

I play for the nostalgia, it is amusing to what people trying to fumble their way through the world, rather than leaping over it in epic bounds.

I always play for fun and that is what I am having. If I become bored, then I will stop playing.


Simon

 

[Licheking]

I GM Runequest because it has Glorantha, and i collect rpg's. This is my 30th or so in my collection. I like the way combat works, the skills and the magic, but most of all i like Glorantha. Some of my players are older Runequest fans and they like what Mongoose has done to the 2nd age and it also means as one of them told me, that some things are now fresh and new, and can still make them stumble.

This is what i call Gritty, mid level fantasy. The Riddle of Steel being a good example of gritty Low Fantasy and D20 as High Fantasy.

 

[elgrin]

First a content warning; I know before writing this that it will sound pompus and/or boring as I will be on a hobby horse of mine. So anyone who wants to avoid it feel free to slide on to the next post.


I play RQ, in whatever incarnation, because the 'back story' of characters, even just rolled up always feels credible. A few sessions later and I know myself who the character is and what their motivations and probable reactions to a social encounter (in the sense of reaction to the society around them), will be. The societies (especially Glorantha) are so well drawn at the beginning and developed so respectfully to the original concept, that as a player it is easy to drop into the mindset of the individual and as a GM it is easy to keep the players focussed on what they need to remember about how the cult/religion/beliefs should cause their character to think about.
The characters have always developed gradually and in ways that most players have found unexpected: as they react to the environment, rather than following the well worn path of their 'class'.
Also it is great fun to watch the ability of players to get their characters into, and then extricate themslves from, trouble which te GM had no intention to create as part of the campaign.

Told you it would be pompus didn't I - you were warned.

elgrin

P.S. One of my mates (a Yelmalio Runelord) really did say 'This is the stuff Heros are made of' as he rolled the dice, and sure enough immediately nearly drowned and required serious Divine Intervention.

 

[Rurik]

P.S. One of my mates (a Yelmalio Runelord) really did say 'This is the stuff Heros are made of' as he rolled the dice, and sure enough immediately nearly drowned and required serious Divine Intervention.

At least he wasn't done in a by a trollkin!

And I thought your post was good, I feel much the same way. If pompous means wanting more from your game than loot and xp's and feats then count me in!

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

If pompous means wanting more from your game than loot and xp's and feats then count me in!

Ru, are you capable of seeing D&D in any other light, I wonder?

 

[Loz]

I've played BRP for almost 25/26 years, and I find that pretty much any variation you care to take - from RQ2, through Ringworld, Stormbringer, and right up to MRQ, plays intuitvely, easily, and, most importantly, maturely. Different variations offer different facets that suit different genres and games. As it's a simple, reasonably unified system, it's easy to mix and match the things you want without there being too much impact on anything else.

Why do I play MRQ? I was deeply sceptical of it at first, and there are still some issues with the system that clunk with a loud CLUNK. But they're not so awful that they can't be fixed quite easily, or ignored completely. I think MRQ offers a decent compromise between RQ2 (my first intro to BRP) and Elric (the best BRP incarnation yet). I like that mix.

I like what I've seen of GtSA. I never got into 3rd Age because in the heyday of the RQ2 boxed sets, like Pavis, Rubble and Borderlands, I couldn't afford to buy them. When I could, they were OOP. By then, I was heavily into Stormbringer and Ringworld, and Glorantha was on the fringe of that. With time, I've got to know Third Age Glorantha better, but I still feel a stranger there. With Second Age, I'm in at the beginning, and have the opportunity to enjoy it fresh and new, but with the depth of knowledge that comes from all Third Age material I've collected in recent years.

 

[Rurik]

If pompous means wanting more from your game than loot and xp's and feats then count me in!

Ru, are you capable of seeing D&D in any other light, I wonder?

Actually, I quite like it by firelight. Book burnings can be fun. (Note to self, spend more Improvement points on Runecasting (Fire)).

Seriously though in the end the system is always secondary to the GM running a game and the players. I'm sure there are D&D games out there that I would enjoy greatly, and that there are groups out there comitting blaspehemies with some of my favourite systems.

And honestly, everything I know about AD&D after first edition I learned from Bioware. Which is a case in point - they made some pretty awesome computer games based on the D&D system. Based on that limited knowledge of 3.X - I think the changes since 1st Ed. are for the better.

But it is not the system for me, and maybe this next bit is just a product of it being the most common game out there, but it seems to appeal to the type of gamer who is looking for all the things that I consider - and here comes the pomposity - shallow in gaming. Which is fine, I don't mean shallow in a bad or condescending way, they are doing what is (hopefully) fun for them - which is the whole point of gaming. That is the beauty of this hobby. Some want Diablo, some want Daggerfall, and any ruleset can accomodate either type - it is just that some rulests are better suited for certain types of games than others.

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

If pompous means wanting more from your game than loot and xp's and feats then count me in!

Ru, are you capable of seeing D&D in any other light, I wonder?

Actually, I quite like it by firelight. Book burnings can be fun. (Note to self, spend more Improvement points on Runecasting (Fire)).

Seriously though in the end the system is always secondary to the GM running a game and the players. I'm sure there are D&D games out there that I would enjoy greatly, and that there are groups out there comitting blaspehemies with some of my favourite systems.

And honestly, everything I know about AD&D after first edition I learned from Bioware. Which is a case in point - they made some pretty awesome computer games based on the D&D system. Based on that limited knowledge of 3.X - I think the changes since 1st Ed. are for the better.

But it is not the system for me, and maybe this next bit is just a product of it being the most common game out there, but it seems to appeal to the type of gamer who is looking for all the things that I consider - and here comes the pomposity - shallow in gaming. Which is fine, I don't mean shallow in a bad or condescending way, they are doing what is (hopefully) fun for them - which is the whole point of gaming. That is the beauty of this hobby. Some want Diablo, some want Daggerfall, and any ruleset can accomodate either type - it is just that some rulests are better suited for certain types of games than others.

Actually, I didn't mean to sound like I was disagreeing with you. A large number of the D&D games I've played in were indeed of the piss-poor character-optimising, endless fighting variety. The system as it is rewards that kind of play, and it's down to GMs to compensate for that if their players are cool enough to take their characters in different directions.

Luckily, mine are. But several years ago? Not so much. Those were some sucky times.

 

[Halfbat]

I've played BRP [...] pretty much any variation you care to take - from RQ2, through Ringworld, Stormbringer, and right up to MRQ, plays intuitvely, easily, and, most importantly, maturely.

Good choice of words. Again, without sounding pompous (is that a theme for this thread :wink: ), the "intuitively" and "maturely" may be it. As others have said, it _encourages_ roleplaying, character development and strong interaction much more than the class system (ime anyway, and that's fairly lengthy). There's so little asking "can I do this" or "damn, no Rogue/Fighter/Cleric/{insert class of choice}") and much more "We will..." or "I will try..." :lol: .

And that's accepting that I've played in some cracking D&D games, even LG. But with RQ and MRQ the players start running their characters and interacting with them and the world right from the word "go" (or the words "You're all marooned on a beach after your ship sank, the only survivors...." :twisted: ).

MRQ probably requires a more flexible GM style and, as mentioned above (too), the ability to cope with whatever the PCs do - they have so much more freedom.

In short, I suppose it makes for a more satisfying game.

 

[Loz]

You can certainly find mature 'class n level'-driven games: Bushido springs readily to mind. It has all the D&D hallmarks - character classes, levels of experience, (but only a maximum of 6), XP (two types), saving throws, and a d20 mechanic. Yet somehow, it's both a mature and intuitive system, and definitely promotes roleplaying above hack n slash. To me, it was D&D how D&D should've been done...

 

[Enpeze]

I am playing BRP since more than 2 decades. It was, is and will be the best rule system in the roleplaying world and my only system of choice. In darker times I was forced by friends to play other systems like Warhammer, Gurps and even D&D but it was every single evening a bad experience. (especially D&D)
I say always a good roleplay experience/story needs three things. Players which understand to act "in role", an interesting world setting and a good rule system (BRP).

RQ/MRQ is just one of many incarnations of BRP and I use it for my fantasy games. (no glorantha, but a homebrewn world)

What I like?
-classless
-few, very intuitive easy rules
-realistic and deadly

BRP supports our playing style which is full of descriptions and very interactive. But other systems are often getting in the way of it. Thats the difference.

 

[weasel_fierce]

I like both Warhammer and GURPS actually

The biggest thing is...not only is it prudent to parlay and surrender, but the world supports it in Runequest.

It gives an option to combat other than "either the party dies or these critters do"

More importantly, Glorantha doesnt have goon monsters. Even the broo and trollkin have purpose beyond "get subjected to genocide and pillaging by the forces of Good"

 

[Enpeze]

I like both Warhammer and GURPS actually

The biggest thing is...not only is it prudent to parlay and surrender, but the world supports it in Runequest.

It gives an option to combat other than "either the party dies or these critters do"

More importantly, Glorantha doesnt have goon monsters. Even the broo and trollkin have purpose beyond "get subjected to genocide and pillaging by the forces of Good"

Gurps, I admit, is not THAT bad. Its similar in its approach to BRP, but its much too complicated for me. But Warhammer? (würg)

Well, I have never played in Glorantha (its generally ok, but too many things I dont like) so I have not much idea which option you mean. But dont you think that parlaying and surrendering should be part of every interesting game world? At least depending on the culture setting of the adventure? Should that mentioned seperately as "advantage" of a certain system? Ransoms and parlaying is for me rather a social custom similar to eating spicy redcrab stew or wearing feathered robes than "system". In some cultures its usual, in some it is seen as weakness.

 

[Rurik]

Well, I have never played in Glorantha (its generally ok, but too many things I dont like) so I have not much idea which option you mean. But dont you think that parlaying and surrendering should be part of every interesting game world? At least depending on the culture setting of the adventure? Should that mentioned seperately as "advantage" of a certain system? Ransoms and parlaying is for me rather a social custom similar to eating spicy redcrab stew or wearing feathered robes than "system". In some cultures its usual, in some it is seen as weakness.

Certainly any game may include parlay and ransom, RQ has no patent on those. I think it gets credit for those as a 'feature' for two reasons. First, as has been mentioned upthread, in a deadly system where even a trollkin can kill a Runelord with a lucky blow (trust me) parlay and surrender are much more attractive options. And second, it was the first system to emphasize these options in the rules, way back in the 70's. Groovy brotha'.