I am not tied to the setting of Glorantha at all. Knowing that, what version of RuneQuest is your personal favorite/would you choose?
I am trying to decide currently between RQ 2, RQ 6/Mythras, Magic World or possibly if I buy it and start to grok the Glorantha setting, the new RQ Glorantha.
Hmm... it's a good question. I have all of them except for the new version, which from what I've seen turns me off.
I would say either RQ2 or Mythras/ RQ6 depending on what kind of game you like playing. RQ2 is lightweight and old school. It doesn't have as many bells and whistles but if you want to take the basic underlying framework and build on top of it, its all very accessible. Like other OSR games you're going to rely a lot on rulings instead of "rules".
From RQ3 to Mythras you get more or less all the same mechanical stuff. RQ3 feels grittier and crunchier to me and Mythras more smooth and polished, but you get all the different magical schools, cultures, etc. You get all the rules you need for full blown world modeling and its more about what kind of setting you want to bolt on top.
None of these come with Glorantha baked in. It's there in RQ2 but its early on in the development and most of the real Glorantha stuff is in the supplements, not the core game. You can pretty much do whatever you want with it. From RQ3 to Mythras Glorantha is abstracted out and the default setting is some kind of vague fantasy dark ages Europe. There's so little setting detail its pretty obvious they expect you will use this as a rule system for your own setting.
For what its worth, I really enjoyed MY Glorantha game (YGWV - Your Glorantha Will Vary). This is another reason I don't care for the current incarnation, which seems to be pushing an "Official Glorantha" catering to the woke gaming crowd.
Magic World is more a simplified clone of Stormbringer than it is of Runequest. They share an underlying mechanical framework and similar chargen systems, but have different hit point/ damage tracking systems, magic systems, etc.
Quote from: Batjon on November 02, 2020, 11:12:56 AM
I am not tied to the setting of Glorantha at all. Knowing that, what version of RuneQuest is your personal favorite/would you choose?
Ruleswise, both RQ2 and RQ3 are decent rulesets. Personally, though, I would recommend Stormbringer (or Elric!) if you aren't that interested in Glorantha. The Stormbringer rules fix my main issue with Runequest which was how the fixed armor values made characters immune to many weapons and enemies. Stormbringer has a die roll for armor DR which improves this situation tremendously.
As for source material, it's probably not a surprise that I prefer the stuff from RQ2 and RQ3. Avalon Hill actually released a bunch of really good supplements (Dorastor, Sun Country being two of them) which don't get much attention today. IMO, the modern Glorantha material goes way to in depth on all sorts of trivial cultural info. The lack of this triviality makes the older material more flexible and easier to write adventures for. No one wants to read a 300 page book just to play a game.
If restricted to just the RuneQuests, my favourite flavour lies somewhere between RQ2 and RQ3. That's probably mostly down to familiarity, but I do find the complexity just about right (well, these days it's a bit too much). The percentile and hit location systems also simulate reality reasonably easily without adding in a lot of special cases or rules, so it's very easy to port into any setting you choose.
Out of the whole family of game systems, though, I find Magic World hits the spot for crunch vs. playability. I'd say it may be a little less "realistic" than RQ but that's quite a loaded term anyway - mostly it just measures realism as perceived by the players. Magic Worls is a bit simpler, faster, and less predictable than RQ, which makes for more exciting play in my opinion.
Probably RQ 3 or Mythras, because I currently have copies of those. I wouldn't object to RQ 2, or even RQ 1. If they come out with a version of Lyonesse that is less expensive and marketed with less woke, then that would be my first choice (more because of the setting than the rules, though).
Barring that, I doubt RQ in any form is making it to the top of my run list in the next few years. I'm a little burned out on the Glorantha association even when considering it for a completely different setting. Plus, my own homebrew, D&D-style leaning, games are certainly drifting heavily towards some of the same areas that I like that RQ does well. So the impetus to run RQ to scratch that itch isn't really there.
Mythras has been getting pretty good support. Several books in their Mythic Earth line... Britain, Rome, Constantinople, Babylon... Greece is coming soon. Plus expansions into other genres. 3rd party stuff as well.
Magic World is a favorite, more streamlined than Mythras... but if support matters, it only got one supplement and some (good) fan documents. Also, people like to complain about the title, the art, the layout, the typos... but for none of that has been an issue for our group. Plus, Magic World seems to be on sale these days.
Both games have free quickstarts, IIRC.
I've GMed and played RQ2, RQ3, Stormbringer, and Hawkmoon. On balance I prefer the greater simplicity of RQ2 over RQ3. I disliked RQ3 Sorcery and Shamanism and the Fatigue system, while eminently resonable in theory was too much of a pain to calculate for every NPC or to track in combat.
Stormbringer and Hawkmoon are fine as long as you don't want everyone to have magic and to cast spells. As everyone a spell caster was one of the features I liked about Runequest (and I'd prefer the next campaign I run to be one where all the PCs can cast magic), I won't pick Stormbringer/BRP. If you want a divide between fighters and non magic users, then Stormbringer/BRP is probably the way to go.
I only have a couple of Mongoose products, but they seem rather slip shod or lacking in play testing. So I wouldn't use that.
Mythras seems like it is designed to appeal to people who are already experienced with Runequest and who now want more rules. As I age and as my main player group evolves into a more casual, less rules oriented group less, rather than more, rules is my preference so I don't see any appeal in learning an elaborated version of Runequest.
I just got a copy of RQ Glorantha. So far, it seems more like RQ2 with a lot more setting information. The clan and economic holding information reminds me of Pendragon - mostly in a good way. I got the rules it in a slip cover package along with the Bestiary and Game Master's Screen. I didn't think I'd get much out of the Bestiary, but it seems like it will actually be more useful than I expected. The maps and Sartar information in the GM pack seems like exactly what we wanted back in the early-mid 1980s, but did not have. I'm not far enough into reading the RQ rules to see how it compares with RQ 1-3. So far, it seems closer to RQ2 - which for me is a feature not a flaw and it seems to have mitigated at least some of the problems I had with Shamanism and Sorcery.
The RQ:G character creation is significantly more elaborate than RQ2 (again more like Pendragon) and it follows a family-oriented life path creation. It definitely presumes a more connected, homeland oriented style of play and some folks will like that. Those who prefer rootless, wandering heroes or who want to create a new character in < 10 minutes probably won't like it. The rules do include options to truncate or skip the background creation. If you don't want Glorantha or a setting that is like Glorantha with the serial numbers filed off, RQ:G may not be your best bet for system. I'd go with Classic Runequest 1 or 2 instead.
Until I've had a chance to finish reading and creating a few characters the jury is still out on what I think is the best system.
Quote from: Batjon on November 02, 2020, 11:12:56 AM
I am not tied to the setting of Glorantha at all. Knowing that, what version of RuneQuest is your personal favorite/would you choose?
I am trying to decide currently between RQ 2, RQ 6/Mythras, Magic World or possibly if I buy it and start to grok the Glorantha setting, the new RQ Glorantha.
For one thing, do you know if you like D100 mechanics or not? If so, what do you like about them?
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll on November 03, 2020, 05:15:32 AM
Quote from: Batjon on November 02, 2020, 11:12:56 AM
I am not tied to the setting of Glorantha at all. Knowing that, what version of RuneQuest is your personal favorite/would you choose?
I am trying to decide currently between RQ 2, RQ 6/Mythras, Magic World or possibly if I buy it and start to grok the Glorantha setting, the new RQ Glorantha.
For one thing, do you know if you like D100 mechanics or not? If so, what do you like about them?
I like that I know exactly what my chances of success are immediately when looking at my skills. I like the quick adjudication fo skill checks and combat. I like hit locations and HPs per location. I like the more visceral/slightly more realistic feel of combat. I like that armor acts like armor and doesn't make me harder to hit. I like weapon and armor degradation, as long as it isn't overdone. I like weapon reach being a slight factor and strike ranks for initiative.
I'll give shout out to OpenQuest by d101 Games. 3rd edition was just kickstarted. Older ones are not available to buy anymore, though you can find them if you look. In short, a nice fantasy d100 game.
https://openquestrpg.com/ (https://openquestrpg.com/)
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/645319106/openquest-3rd-edition (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/645319106/openquest-3rd-edition)
RQ 6/Mythras is my favorite because as RQ there is not much Glorantha at all and as Mythras there is even less. Of course as I explain this to a friend who wanted to play something besides D&D he buys new RQ (which I do have too, just would rather run Mythras) therefore I guess I will be running new RQ.
Quote from: Batjon on November 03, 2020, 12:36:28 PM
I like hit locations and HPs per location.
If this is a must, your options are narrowed down to RuneQuest or Mythras. OpenQuest and Magic World both use general hit points and not hit locations.
Mythras!!!
My favorite iteration of the runequests cause, well, it just hits me right in my tender parts.
I am a huge fan of RQ3, but I do prefer the new RuneQuest Glorantha (RQG).
For me, RQG has a lot of new rules that work really well, for example Rune Pools, Passions, Runes, Shamanic Powers, harder to be killed by a single blow and so on. Sure, some of the rules are a mishmash of RQ2/3 and could have been edited a lot better, but it is still as flavoursome as RQ2 and as detailed as RQ3.
Although the timeline has jumped ahead, it is still good to get the RQ Classic supplements as PDFs and use them until we get more support for RQG.
Anyone know why Runequest: Glorantha switched how many Spirit Magic spells you could know from INT to CHA?
It seems to have turned CHA into an uber stat for most characters and, unless you use Sorcery, it's turned INT into a bit of a dump stat. Is that the same or different from Mythras?
Quote from: Bren on November 10, 2020, 12:47:59 AM
Anyone know why Runequest: Glorantha switched how many Spirit Magic spells you could know from INT to CHA?
It seems to have turned CHA into an uber stat for most characters and, unless you use Sorcery, it's turned INT into a bit of a dump stat. Is that the same or different from Mythras?
I haven't actually run any Mythras, but I've spent a considerable amount of time reading and messing around with RQ6/Mythras, and have briefly perused some other RQ material.
I believe that Mythras Folk Magic is equivalent to Spirit Magic in earlier systems. There is no cap on the total number of Folk Magic spells learnable in Mythras. The Folk Magic skill is based on CHA + POW, and the number of starting spells is equal to 10% of initial Folk Magic skill.
Apart from it's use in various skills, INT is a key factor in determining Action Points, which makes it far from a dump stat. You could potentially dump either INT or DEX if you don't want to maximise Action Points, but unless you've houseruled fixed Action Points, you can't dump both. Many people consider 3AP mandatory, which means you need decent values in both.
CHA does tend to be more useful than INT in general for magical things other than Sorcery, but certainly not to the point that it is any sort of across-the-board uber stat. CHA actually provides an advancement bonus (getting along well with people makes you easier to train) to try and avoid the impression that it's the least useful stat.
Quote from: zarion on November 04, 2020, 07:38:21 PM
Mythras!!!
I took a look at Mythras and it appears to be fully owned by Design Mechanism. The new version of Chaosium's Runequest claims copywrite on the original Chaosium versions but not on RuneQuest 6 or the Mongoose version. And there is still Legends which is Mongoose's deGloranthified Runequest.
It looks to me like you have three different companies selling the same game all without licensing it from one another. If I made my own version of d100 fantasy, which of them would could sue me? Or are the basic rules of d100 just public domain under the "you can't copywrite game rules" thing?
QuoteI took a look at Mythras and it appears to be fully owned by Design Mechanism. The new version of Chaosium's Runequest claims copywrite on the original Chaosium versions but not on RuneQuest 6 or the Mongoose version. And there is still Legends which is Mongoose's deGloranthified Runequest.
It looks to me like you have three different companies selling the same game all without licensing it from one another. If I made my own version of d100 fantasy, which of them would could sue me? Or are the basic rules of d100 just public domain under the "you can't copywrite game rules" thing?
It's not public domain as such; game mechanics themselves aren't subject to copyright - so anyone can create their own d100 variant, just as the OSR has created AD&D variants. Copyright is only involved if you start copying how another company expresses the rules - then there may be a copyright issue. But if you write up your rules from scratch, then no one is going to sue you for it.
Now, if you want to establish association with a particular brand flavour of RQ - such as Chaosium's RQ or our own Mythras, then that's where licensing of some kind comes into play, or using something like the OGL and SRDs. OpenQuest, Revolution d100 and Legend all work on this premise. Mythras works differently, and we have a generous Gateway License for those who want to create their own Mythras content for publication. Chaosium has its own arrangements, including the Jonstown Compendium community content program.
I got to play a game of Mythras at a convention with Loz once. He runs a great game, and the system really intrigued me.
If I was going to run a flavour of Runequest, I would run Mythras.
Quote from: Sable Wyvern on November 10, 2020, 04:54:46 AM
Quote from: Bren on November 10, 2020, 12:47:59 AMIt seems to have turned CHA into an uber stat for most characters and, unless you use Sorcery, it's turned INT into a bit of a dump stat. Is that the same or different from Mythras?
I haven't actually run any Mythras, but I've spent a considerable amount of time reading and messing around with RQ6/Mythras, and have briefly perused some other RQ material.
I believe that Mythras Folk Magic is equivalent to Spirit Magic in earlier systems. There is no cap on the total number of Folk Magic spells learnable in Mythras. The Folk Magic skill is based on CHA + POW, and the number of starting spells is equal to 10% of initial Folk Magic skill.
There is a cap in RQ:G equal to your CHA in points of Spirit Magic. In RQ2 and RQ3 the limit was your INT in points of Spirit Magic. This change from INT to CHA for how many spirit magic spells you can know is what seems peculiar to me.
Your chance to cast is equal to your POWx5%. Your bonus for Magic skills like Meditate or Spirit Lore are based on POW and CHA. INT has no effect on either. (However it does have a large effect for Sorcery.)
QuoteApart from it's use in various skills, INT is a key factor in determining Action Points, which makes it far from a dump stat.
RQ:G uses Strike Ranks not Action Points. Strike Ranks, which are based on DEX and SIZ. INT has no effect. So it sounds like INT is maybe a bit more useful/necessary in Mythras.
QuoteCHA does tend to be more useful than INT in general for magical things other than Sorcery, but certainly not to the point that it is any sort of across-the-board uber stat.
In RQ:G CHA controls how many spirits you can bind or control.
QuoteCHA actually provides an advancement bonus (getting along well with people makes you easier to train) to try and avoid the impression that it's the least useful stat.
In RQ:G, INT
is the best stat for skill bonuses. (It provides half again as much of an addition as the next best stats.) DEX and POW tie as the second best stats for skill bonuses. CHA and STR are 4th and 5th and both provide significantly less benefit than do DEX and POW. CON doesn't figure at all in stat bonuses and SIZ, when it matters at all, has a negative effect on skill bonuses.