Would you switch to RuneQuest?

[dbhoward]

If Mongoose came out with a Conan product for RuneQuest (assuming they could get the license & other practicalities), would you buy it?

 

[djd]

At this stage probably not .

I haven't tried Runequest 2 but I didn't really like what Mongoose had done with their first go at Runequest (in it's Elric form). I like Chaoniums BRP very much and quite honestly I don't think that Mongoose was anywhere near as good in terms of it's simplicity and playability.

I'm just getting to grips with D20 and I can actually see that it works pretty well with the Conan setting. If Mongoose started getting things right the first time round (and proofreading their stuff!!!!) I'd me more inclined to shell out again.

 

[Dark Lord Skippy]

Its a pretty moot question isnt it??

But the answer is "sorta". I would NOT change the rules system I use for my campaigns so I'd be highly uninterested in buying a new rules book.

OTOH, I'd welcome any campaign source material from which I can glean information to support a campaign. Certainly any printed adventures, "nation" sourcebooks, and so forth would be purchased by me.

 

[Pascalahad]

Experience has showed me I'm weak-minded enough to buy everything labelled "Conan", or "Babylon 5" for that matter (I purchased all second edition books after I swore I never would + the Traveller version of B5 even if I didn't own the Traveller rules back then).

But I won't use Runequest 2 rules, that's for sure. Better stay with D20 or another system (I'm currently eyeing D6 Fantasy for a try).

 

[rabindranath72]

Probably not. I have already a good "engine" for Conan games with Chaosium's Stormbringer rpg (4th edition by Ken St. Andre). But I would buy a supplement if it could be easily converted to Stormbringer.

 

[djd]

I too used to run a Conan game using the 1st edition of Stormbringer. As I say, I like those BRP rules

 

[kintire]

No. I consider the system a very poor fit.

 

[Hervé]

I think the system would need some reworking and adptation to reflect the hyboian world, as it has been done for the D20, but a RQ Conan would be far more appealing to me than a D20 one...

 

[LucaCherstich]

Never.
Never.
Never.

 

[Jacek]

Whatever. I don't need any more rules sets but I'm craving for every bit of background so if those RQ books bring good measure of it, I'll give them a try.

 

[Paladyn]

I like RuneQuest. Actually, I ike those rules more, than d20, so basically... yes. I'd switch.

 

[Azgulor]

NO.

 

[tarkhan bey]

Yes, and its one of the few settings that could tempt me to purchase MRQ2 in order to play it.

 

[Spectator]

No to RQ

 

[Spectator]

No to RQ

 

[Clovenhoof]

Definitely not, no matter if Mongoose or anyone else did it.

#1, I tried the RQ system once and hated it,

#2, it just doesn't seem to be a good fit for a Conan-style game.

#3, and most importantl, we have recently converted our game to Savage Worlds and are very happy with it. I can cordially recommend SW to anyone who's not satisfied with D20 anymore.

 

[Hervé]

It all depends whether you play the game for its setting or for its engine. It seems we have players from both categories here. Personally, I'll be ready for any Conan stuff whatever the system as long it's good stuff. It amazes me to see that some people would bypass a good Conan supplement if it's not written from their favourite system.

 

[kintire]

It amazes me to see that some people would bypass a good Conan supplement if it's not written from their favourite system.

Refusing to switch to RQ is not the same as refusing to buy a mostly-fluff Conan book for use in a d20 Conan game (or SW or whatever). That said, you have to make a more considered decision, as the book will be of less value because all the sections on game mechanics are useless. This would matter more or less depending on the content.

 

[Supplement Four]

It amazes me to see that some people would bypass a good Conan supplement if it's not written from their favourite system.

I'm like that. I love Traveller, but I'm a Classic Traveller player. So, I don't buy GURPS and I don't buy Mongoose Traveller.

I'd be the same with Conan. I play the Conan 2E rules. A supplement for, say, the Basic Roleplaying system is no use to me*.





*Unless I find it for rock, bottom, near-nothin' prices.

I learned this lesson back with TNE came out for Traveller. I bought a bunch of that crap and never opened the TNE stuff I bought. The stuff I could us in the CT game, though, I use and continue to use all the time.

 

[djd]

I'm not anti RQ as a system - indeed I think it would be pretty good for Conan - but when I start looking at the Mongoose RQ line and I see 8 pages of errata for the Arms and Equipment supplement, 7 pages for the main rulebook.... It REALLY puts me off. I mean, this is supposed to be a revised version of an existing game. There's no excuse for such sloppy production values from one of the major forces in the industry. Time and time again Mongoose let themselves down in this regard. A simple proof read would take out half the mistakes.