Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

RuneQuest 6 - The Design Mechanism


Other RPGs

Osirion

Anyone checked it out yet?

Looks good, but I am only a few chapters into it.


I bought the PDF seems a bit more complex than MRQ2 to me.

Osirion

It's basically the same authors, who have expanded and clarified some of the rules.

Its Fairly large, weighing in at 450+ pages, but in theory its a complete book

Andoran

Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

I haven't read MRQ2 (only MRQ1) but it is more complicated (two different ranges for ranged combat, one for weapon effectiveness and a general one for accuracy), however the authors have put in a number of optional rules to avoid some of that complexity which I great.

Osirion

I've been slowly reading through the book and here are a few things Ive learned

Characteristics:
Strength, Constituition, Dexterity, Power, Charasima, Intelligence, and Size
You can roll or there is a point assign option
(I'm having a really hard time accepting size as a stat, human range is 8-18, a dragon size is 50, which means is about 320cm (13' tall, weighing about 1000 lbs which seems almost small for a dragon, there may be some monster size ive not gotten to yet tho )

Game is skill based using percentile roll under mechanic
22 general skills, a wide range of suggested professional skills

Character creation is basically

Roll/Pick stats

Calculate derived attributes, (HP, attack points, strike ranks, magic points)

Determine baseline for general skills (Usually 2 stats added together)

Pick a culture (Barbarian, Civilized, Nomadic or Primative)
Option to pick 3 new professional skills, add 100 points between them and general skills, pick your cultural Passions

Background (big chart)

Pick a career, generally your culture determines which careers are open to you, careers grant access to additional professional skills, then get another 100 skill points to divvy up between skills, determine if your career grants access to magic, also decide if you want to join a cult/brotherhood

Pick an age, how old you are determines your final skill allotment, and how much your skills can improve

Get your gear and get playing

There are no classes, there are no levels, your choices determine what skills you have, and which you are best at, its entirely possible to be terrible at all skills, or to start with a skill or 2 close to 70 or 80...

Magic isnt a section Ive read yet... but character creation seems interesting
That size is a stat is really.. really bugging me tho

Andoran

"That size is a stat is really.. really bugging me tho"

Mate, relax about that. Size has been a stat in RQ and all the other games that came out of it since their beginning in 1978. Call of Cthulhu, Worlds of Wonder, ElfQuest, Stormbringer, Nephilim, Pendragon. All have used it and it works well to help represent the role mass plays in ability to give and receive damage. Once the skills are derived, though, stats play little direct role in RQ6 so as I said, don't worry at it.

Do move onto the magic sections and the cults/brotherhoods section, to see where RQ6 really shines, not forgetting Combat Styles and Special Effects in combat...

Osirion

Believe it or not, I managed to miss the entire runequest family of games over the past 30 years. Heard of them, but never really bothered to find them or play them.

I went from D&D into Palladium, and from there into rolemaster, shadowrun, traveller etc.

I only recently picked up BRP, and from there Stormbringer and 4th ed Pendragon at a yard sale, Then picked up runequest 6th, and overall, it seems incredibly well made.

But size as a characteristic seems really limiting/restircitve

A stat/characteristic should always be relevant, strength should do fine for damage bonus, but you need to consider size as well?

I did find that creatures can use a different weight chart, since its hard to make a blue while fit, or an elephant etc.

It seems to be a hold over that they have failed to revise out.. through 6 editions


heimdallsgothi wrote:

But size as a characteristic seems really limiting/restircitve

A stat/characteristic should always be relevant, strength should do fine for damage bonus, but you need to consider size as well?

D&D/Pathfinder also has a stat for size, except that instead of being 3-18 it's fine/diminutive/tiny/small/medium/large/huge/gargantuan/colossal.

Size can have a great impact on stride and speed, reach (not only for fighting but for jumping/climbing) and general constitution.

'findel


Quote:

But size as a characteristic seems really limiting/restircitve

A stat/characteristic should always be relevant, strength should do fine for damage bonus, but you need to consider size as well?

Size (SIZ) is used to calculate Damage Modifier and Hit Points. It also functions as a general comparator for height/weight and mass, which some players find important, whereas others do not. It is both functional and indicative, and I've never come across anyone who finds SIZ to be limiting or restrictive.

Quote:
I did find that creatures can use a different weight chart, since its hard to make a blue while fit, or an elephant etc.

Yes, creatures have a separate height/weight chart because differing physiologies require a different treatment of the SIZ characteristic. If you also read the section detailing how to determine a creature's combat capabilities, such as damage and reach, you'll see that SIZ is an integral part of the process.

Quote:
It seems to be a hold over that they have failed to revise out.. through 6 editions

There are certain things that are inherently 'RuneQuest': SIZ is one of them. Although you may not like its presence, 'revising it out' would have resulted in howls of protest from long-time fans, and accusations that 'without SIZ its not RQ'.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

*sigh* Runequest 6 is out... I missed that and I skipped the Mongoose versions. But I don't think I can skip this one, especially if it's set in Glorantha. The background information mentioned above sounds right for that. And yeah, Size has always worked well in RQ.


The examples in the RQ6 book don't use Glorantha. The Design Mechanism do sell some of the old Mongoose Second Age material. Moon Design are producing excellent material for the setting.

Oi, Loz, practising thread necromancy now are we.


Bluenose wrote:

The examples in the RQ6 book don't use Glorantha. The Design Mechanism do sell some of the old Mongoose Second Age material. Moon Design are producing excellent material for the setting.

Oi, Loz, practising thread necromancy now are we.

I ve noticed(from covers and the preview) that RQ6 has this heavy Greek vibe in the design department. I was surprised but I finally dig that.

I think the celt/viking thing has been overdone...

But obviously I'm not a RQ expert, I ve only recently discovered the whole family; so no offence meant.


@stroVal wrote:

I've noticed(from covers and the preview) that RQ6 has this heavy Greek vibe in the design department. I was surprised but I finally dig that.

I think the celt/viking thing has been overdone...

But obviously I'm not a RQ expert, I've only recently discovered the whole family; so no offence meant.

No offence taken here. I suspect there's a deliberate call-back to the RQ2 cover - this one - with the RQ6 version. Not, fortunately, the GW version, which still makes me shudder.


Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:

I've noticed(from covers and the preview) that RQ6 has this heavy Greek vibe in the design department. I was surprised but I finally dig that.

I think the celt/viking thing has been overdone...

But obviously I'm not a RQ expert, I've only recently discovered the whole family; so no offence meant.

No offence taken here. I suspect there's a deliberate call-back to the RQ2 cover - this one - with the RQ6 version. Not, fortunately, the GW version, which still makes me shudder.

Interesting...

GW version?

Andoran

I've been playing RQ since 2 came out. Had 6 on pre-order, so I've had it for a while. It's not quite up to 2s standards, if you ask me, but better than everything since...it lacks the magic items, which I loved...but it has the right feel.


@stroVal wrote:
Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:

I've noticed(from covers and the preview) that RQ6 has this heavy Greek vibe in the design department. I was surprised but I finally dig that.

I think the celt/viking thing has been overdone...

But obviously I'm not a RQ expert, I've only recently discovered the whole family; so no offence meant.

No offence taken here. I suspect there's a deliberate call-back to the RQ2 cover - this one - with the RQ6 version. Not, fortunately, the GW version, which still makes me shudder.

Interesting...

GW version?

This thing. You'll notice the same general pattern, a woman fighting off a lizard-creature with shield and sword. And the difference - on the Chaosium cover she's in sensible armour, on the Games Workshop printing she's in a bikini.

Here is the RQ6 cover. The similarities must surely be deliberate.


Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:
Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:

I've noticed(from covers and the preview) that RQ6 has this heavy Greek vibe in the design department. I was surprised but I finally dig that.

I think the celt/viking thing has been overdone...

But obviously I'm not a RQ expert, I've only recently discovered the whole family; so no offence meant.

No offence taken here. I suspect there's a deliberate call-back to the RQ2 cover - this one - with the RQ6 version. Not, fortunately, the GW version, which still makes me shudder.

Interesting...

GW version?

This thing. You'll notice the same general pattern, a woman fighting off a lizard-creature with shield and sword. And the difference - on the Chaosium cover she's in sensible armour, on the Games Workshop printing she's in a bikini.

Here is the RQ6 cover. The similarities must surely be deliberate.

Interesting pictures.

Deluxe edition is RQ 3 correct? The one that breaks the same cover tradition?
(and 4 and 5 are Mongoose's I&II?)


@stroVal wrote:
Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:
Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:

I've noticed(from covers and the preview) that RQ6 has this heavy Greek vibe in the design department. I was surprised but I finally dig that.

I think the celt/viking thing has been overdone...

But obviously I'm not a RQ expert, I've only recently discovered the whole family; so no offence meant.

No offence taken here. I suspect there's a deliberate call-back to the RQ2 cover - this one - with the RQ6 version. Not, fortunately, the GW version, which still makes me shudder.

Interesting...

GW version?

This thing. You'll notice the same general pattern, a woman fighting off a lizard-creature with shield and sword. And the difference - on the Chaosium cover she's in sensible armour, on the Games Workshop printing she's in a bikini.

Here is the RQ6 cover. The similarities must surely be deliberate.

Interesting pictures.

Deluxe edition is RQ 3 correct? The one that breaks the same cover tradition?
(and 4 and 5 are Mongoose's I&II?)

Yes. RQ3 was the Avalon Hill version, with this as the cover image for the deluxe set and the Players book if you bought that separately - though there were other covers too. Good art, but not quite in the tradition. I have to say some of the covers for the other RQ3 books are among my favourites, particularly this one from Shadows on the Borderlands. Of course I know what Thanatari head hunters like to do.

As for MRQ I&II, given that the new version is describing itself as RQ6 I guess they are RQ4 and RQ5 now.


Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:
Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:
Bluenose wrote:
@stroVal wrote:

I've noticed(from covers and the preview) that RQ6 has this heavy Greek vibe in the design department. I was surprised but I finally dig that.

I think the celt/viking thing has been overdone...

But obviously I'm not a RQ expert, I've only recently discovered the whole family; so no offence meant.

No offence taken here. I suspect there's a deliberate call-back to the RQ2 cover - this one - with the RQ6 version. Not, fortunately, the GW version, which still makes me shudder.

Interesting...

GW version?

This thing. You'll notice the same general pattern, a woman fighting off a lizard-creature with shield and sword. And the difference - on the Chaosium cover she's in sensible armour, on the Games Workshop printing she's in a bikini.

Here is the RQ6 cover. The similarities must surely be deliberate.

Interesting pictures.

Deluxe edition is RQ 3 correct? The one that breaks the same cover tradition?
(and 4 and 5 are Mongoose's I&II?)

Yes. RQ3 was the Avalon Hill version, with this as the cover image for the deluxe set and the Players book if you bought that separately - though there were other covers too. Good art, but not quite in the tradition. I have to say some of the covers for the other RQ3 books are among my favourites, particularly this one from Shadows on the Borderlands. Of course I know what Thanatari head hunters like to do.

As for MRQ I&II, given that the new version is describing itself as RQ6 I guess they are...

Cool, thanks for clarifying that :)


Quote:
Here is the RQ6 cover. The similarities must surely be deliberate.

Very deliberate.

One the whole numbering thing, there were good reasons for Mongoose breaking with the existing edition cycle, but I felt that it was time to set it all back into context. The whole RQ2/MRQII thing is wearisome and confusing to explain.


What are the significant rules differences then that make this one a new edition?

The summary upthread could fit any edition of RQ I've seen. I'm a huge fan of the system - in fact it's my go-to system of choice. But I'm not seeing any changes.

I myself made a change a while back; to percentile the characteristics too, bringing them in line with skills. I also did away with hit points and have a four scale wound system instead. (Light, Medium and Severe Wounds, and kill strikes - with variance depending on the body part hit, and weapons giving a percentile bonus to a percentile damage roll.)

BRP/RQ is better imo than D20 systems because it allows descriptive combat results from rolls (GM's don't need to make up what wound you took - the rolls tell you clearly what happened - not abstract a/c and hp results). It avoids the artificiality of 'character class', or level. You can also build whatever character you can imagine - with no need for books full of new character classes. Also, it's basic concepts are elegantly simple - I rarely have any need to consult rulebooks during play - indeed the basic rules have always been possible to summarise effectively on one side of a sheet of paper. With a few tweaks the system works for just about any setting in my experience.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gaming / Other RPGs / RuneQuest 6 - The Design Mechanism All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.