From: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.ient.com Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V4 #65 Reply-To: runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Wednesday, June 6 2001 Volume 04 : Number 065 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever RE: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever RE: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever [RQ-RULES] Combat models Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever RULES OF THE ROAD 1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially not to add "Yeah, I agree" or "No, I disagree." Or be excoriated. If someone writes something good and you want to say "good show" please do. But don't include the whole message you praise. 2. Use an appropriate Subject line. 3. Learn the art of paraphrasing: Don't just quote and comment on a point-by-point basis. 4. No anonymous posting, please. Don't say something unless you're ready to stand by it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 13:14:31 -0400 From: "Leon B Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever The biggest problem I have with Glorantha, is that it is written totally from the subjective view. This is fine for the players but as a GM I find it a pain in the ass. Leon Kirshtein (No good deed shall go unpunished.) - ---- Brian Newman wrote: > I've never played in Greg's Glorantha, so I don't know what it's like. > :) > > Here's the way I see it: since Greg's writing is usually presented > as if > it's "from the world" (i.e. someone in the world wrote it), I treat > it as > accurate for my Glorantha as history textbooks in high school are for > our > real world -- they generally give you an idea of what went on, but > they're > always skewed and sometimes just totally wrong. ___________________________________________________________________ To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax, all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 13:28:59 -0400 From: "Leon B Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever - ---- "Steve Perrin" wrote: > Questions for the list > > Would you pay a reasonable price for a download of more expanded rules, > even > though you have the core rules in hand already (or can get them easily > from > the listmeister)? Please define reasonable. For me under $25 including shipping is reasonable. At that price I would by a copy. > > Do you have any suggestions for a name for the rules, since I can't > call > them RuneQuest? How about 'Fantasy Role Gaming' or 'FRG d100 Edition'? Leon Kirshtein (No good deed shall go unpunished.) ___________________________________________________________________ To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax, all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 11:35:18 -0600 From: "Stephen Posey [TurboPower Software]" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Steve Perrin wrote: > > Stephen's paen of praise for the rules causes me to inquire to the list. Oh man, I've always wanted to create a paen, and here I didn't even know I had ;-) > I am thinking of taking the rules I've done for "RQ4.5" which many of you > have already and self-publishing them with added specs for new monsters, > some common treasures, more background in the magic descriptions, etc. I'd > probably do it as an ebook from the website I intend to put together over > the summer. > > Questions for the list > > Would you pay a reasonable price for a download of more expanded rules, even > though you have the core rules in hand already (or can get them easily from > the listmeister)? I would! > Do you have any suggestions for a name for the rules, since I can't call > them RuneQuest? SymbolPursuit? GlyphHunt? LetterSearch? ;-) Seriously, I've always lamented a bit that the MagicWorld booklet from "Worlds of Wonder" wasn't further expanded upon (as was SuperWorld). I guess some of that is what became RQ3, but I'd like to see something more generic. Is something like "Advanced MagicWorld" a possibility? Stephen Posey slposey@concentric.net *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 12:06:24 -0600 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever > Do you have any suggestions for a name for the rules, since I > can't call them RuneQuest? I wanted to suggest "The d100 system" but someone beat me to it. > Would you pay a reasonable price for a download of more > expanded rules, A professional looking PDF with expanded rules and critters would be very nice to have. Reasonable cost for a PDF download of this type would be in the $12.95 area for me. Monte Cook has a rules expansion for magic in D&D 3rd Ed. It's a 36 page PDF and he's charging $5 for the download. A complete system with a bigger page count still wouldn't go for much over $12.95 I'd think. Just some thoughts. Rich *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 11:02:02 -0700 From: "Steve Perrin" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever It's my intention to check with Chaosium about the rights to Magic World (any Chaosium people actually on this list?). Certainly my current rules owe as much to that as they do to RuneQuest. Maybe WonderWorlds could be used, since I could then expand into the other genres... Any other ideas out there? Oh, and to answer Leon, my idea is to make them a downloadable-with-payment rules set, not formally published (though they will be formatted to be presentable if you print them out). The cost would actually be below $20.00, I think. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Posey [TurboPower Software]" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 10:35 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever > > > Do you have any suggestions for a name for the rules, since I can't call > > them RuneQuest? > > SymbolPursuit? GlyphHunt? LetterSearch? ;-) > > Seriously, I've always lamented a bit that the MagicWorld booklet from > "Worlds of Wonder" wasn't further expanded upon (as was SuperWorld). > > I guess some of that is what became RQ3, but I'd like to see something > more generic. Is something like "Advanced MagicWorld" a possibility? > > Stephen Posey > slposey@concentric.net > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com > with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 11:11:19 +0000 (/etc/localtime) From: Brian Newman Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Yes, I'd pay... not because I might actually use the 4.5 rules exclusively, but because I'd like to take some ideas from them, and more importantly because I'd like to get this rule system back into active publication. As for what you could call it... it's going to be really tough to come up with a name that isn't already copyrighted by someone. Acronyms are all the rage. :) On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Steve Perrin wrote: > Stephen's paen of praise for the rules causes me to inquire to the list. > > I am thinking of taking the rules I've done for "RQ4.5" which many of you > have already and self-publishing them with added specs for new monsters, > some common treasures, more background in the magic descriptions, etc. I'd > probably do it as an ebook from the website I intend to put together over > the summer. > > Questions for the list > > Would you pay a reasonable price for a download of more expanded rules, even > though you have the core rules in hand already (or can get them easily from > the listmeister)? > > Do you have any suggestions for a name for the rules, since I can't call > them RuneQuest? > > Thanks, > > Steve Perrin > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stephen Posey [TurboPower Software]" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 8:33 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever > > > > I appreciate all the work that has been > > put into Glorantha and I find it generally amusing to read about, I > > don't much like gaming in it: something about it just doesn't "feel > > right" to me (completely esthetic and personal, YMMV). > > > > At the same time I LOVE the RQ (and other BRP derived) rules, somehow > > they "make sense" to me and I can work with them almost unconsciously > > (again a strictly esthetic evaluation). > > > > The rules rule! ;-) > > > > Stephen Posey > > slposey@concentric.net > > > > > *************************************************************************** > > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com > > with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. > > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com > with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. > *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 20:53:41 +0200 (CEST) From: dariocor@neomedia.it Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Hi To all > ---- "Steve Perrin" wrote: > > > Questions for the list > > > > Would you pay a reasonable price for a download of more expanded > rules, > > even > > though you have the core rules in hand already (or can get them > easily > > from > > the listmeister) Should the rules book be in a acrobat format, ready to print? Yes, I buy it. I _sincerely_ think RQ was been the best role playing system ever made, and I never shifted to others," new", storytelling systems. I also like Glorantha, and the "divorce" was a really sad think for me. Another thinking; maybe I am mad but... there is a remote possibility to buy the brand "RuneQuest" from Hasbro? Freeng RQ from limbo How many we are? PS. Steve, If you need illustrations for free for the rules layout I am ready. Ciao a tutti Dario Coral *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 21:40:19 +0200 From: Peter Keel Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever * on the Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 08:53:41PM +0200, dariocor@neomedia.it was blubbering: > > Should the rules book be in a acrobat format, ready to print? Yes, I buy it. > I _sincerely_ think RQ was been the best role playing system ever made, and I > never shifted to others," new", storytelling systems. > I also like Glorantha, and the "divorce" was a really sad think for me. > > Another thinking; maybe I am mad but... there is a remote possibility to buy the > brand "RuneQuest" from Hasbro? Freeng RQ from limbo > How many we are? About a year ago, I was asking around precisely this. I'd envision something along the lines of the Open Content philosophy http://www.opencontent.org/ Peter *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 16:01:27 -0400 From: Robert Stancliff Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever > David wrote: > I apologize for what can be perceived as a negative post here. > But, I felt the great need to say that I do not share in Greg's > vision of Glorantha. I liked the Glorantha of RQ2 better, and > don't like Hero Wars much. My love of RuneQuest is because it > models small skirmishes well, swords, spells, tactics, are > important. Lots of fantasy literature deals with combat, and > I like a solid rules system that handles combat fairly and > doesn't leave it in the hands of storytellers. You are certainly not alone in most of this. Basically everyone on this list prefers having a more wargame style of play, or we would have shifted to the Hero Wars list long ago... I don't even know where to find it. I have read the first two HW books closely and I find that the game probably has more flaws and loopholes in it than RQ ever had. Some of the original RQ problem was that the game designers didn't have a deep enough understanding of where Greg really wanted to go. The game could have been better targeted from the start with just a little clearer vision to build on. Remember, any claim that HW is not super RQ is just passing wind... it doesn't mean anything. HW's biggest weakness is that the skill system is non-linear and open-ended. RQ had a skill system that was self limiting and mirrored life better than any system yet written. I will always be a wargamer and when we have tried to play HW, it has had much more of a wargame style than it might for someone like Robin Laws, whom I have met and played Feng Shui with at a convention. HW's only real advantage is a magic system that lends itself well to improvisation and Hero Questing, but it lacks any objective frame to provide external game balance. I know I have trouble providing subjective balance and I am too likely to bias the game in favor of active players. I like the RQ3 game quite well and feel it was a big improvement on RQ2, though it created problems of it's own. I have been collecting ideas for a couple of years now of what I feel needs changing to make a RQ4 that is strongly Gloranthan. As I have mentioned, I could base it on RQ and the BRP system, which would result in a more streamlined combat system, or I could base it on Champions and have a flexible magic system that changes and becomes more improvisational as the character gains experience. Since both methods are building on previous works, there is no chance to get licensing rights and market a product, but as long as I could post my work online I wouldn't sweat too much about profits. Stancliff *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 18:56:28 -0400 From: Andrew Barton Subject: [RQ-RULES] Combat models > My love of RuneQuest > is because it models small skirmishes well, swords, spells, tactics, are > important. I agree that RQ provides rules that give an interesting game with scope for tactical decisions - I like getting advantages by creative use of apprently weak spells. The main disdvantage I've found is that RQ melees take so long to resolve, and can leave some players with little to do for long stretches. The RQ4 drafts I've seen didn't seem likely to improve that side of things. > Lots of fantasy literature deals with combat, By page count, most fantasy literature is concerned with long uncomfortable cross-country journeys. > and I like a solid rules system that handles combat fairly So do your player characters lose their fights about half the time? > and doesn't leave it in the hands of storytellers. That of course is the underlying difference in design aims between RQ and HW. Hero Wars is -explicitly- aimed at representing and re-creating myths and stories, not reality. In some areas, I think HW/Glorantha contains mechanisms and approaches which are also useful for a more 'simulationist' approach - which was why I invoked Greg on the subject of Illusion. Andrew *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 10:24:29 +1000 From: "Jim Lawrie" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ Forever Snip> > improvisation and Hero Questing, but it lacks any objective frame to provide > external game balance. I know I have trouble providing subjective balance > and I am too likely to bias the game in favor of active players. > I like the RQ3 game quite well and feel it was a big improvement on RQ2, > though it created problems of it's own. I have been collecting ideas for a > couple of years now of what I feel needs changing to make a RQ4 that is > strongly Gloranthan. As I have mentioned, I could base it on RQ and the BRP > system, which would result in a more streamlined combat system, or I could > base it on Champions and have a flexible magic system that changes and > becomes more improvisational as the character gains experience. Snip> > Stancliff You're right on the money regarding open ended magic systems Robert, any player who feels his alter ego is threatened begins to look at the rules in a more business like manner and it's important that the rules are given clearly defined limits. This is nowhere more evident than in White Wolf's 'Magician' game, where the rules are truely vague and I've sat in on games featuring players openly vying to see who can twist the rules to their benefit the most, something that I've never seen the RuneQuest rules used for. In my humble, and opinionated, view, there are only two rules systems that are good for face to face play, namely RuneQuest and Cyberpunk 2020. RuneQuest is easily the best hand to hand and magic system in print, it only needs the GM to write up spiffy spell effect descriptions like AD&D(n) has to make the game fantastic for a beginners game, and CP details modern combat better than any other system I''ve encountered so far. We've played RQ in Glorantha, ancient Rome, ancient Greece and post Alexander Egypt, as well as during the Napoleonic wars (using dwarfish flintlocks), the English Civil War (ditto) and the War of the Roses with only a little tweaking (first aid rolls did 1d4 instead of 1d3, and POW rolls were used to check if a 'severed' limb was recoverable or not). RuneQuest? I'm still introducing new players to it! Jim Lawrie *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V4 #65 ************************************ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. RuneQuest is a Trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. With the exception of previously copyrighted material, unless specified otherwise all text in this digest is copyright by the author or authors, with rights granted to copy for personal use, to excerpt in reviews and replies, and to archive unchanged for electronic retrieval.