From: Nick Brooke (100270.337@CompuServe.COM)
Date: Fri 18 Jun 1993 - 02:00:26 EEST
David Hall said I could post these to the RQ4 Playtest Line (he decided not
to join it himself when I told him how the mail-forwarding software works).
The comments were written last September (same time as mine), and like
them never had any feedback or discussion. So the same caveat applies: our
ideas will have changed somewhat in the last eight months, but we weren't
about to waste time honing them by talking to brick walls. Hope you enjoy
these (two parts in total).
-- Nick
__________________________________________________________
COMMENTS ON RUNEQUEST 4
from David Hall
WARNING! Many of my comments may be destructive rather than
constructive. This is because my approach to gaming and rules is for a
rules-lite, role-playing and story-telling system more akin to the
Pendragon approach. I prefer a simple, fast, and exciting epic style,
where I want the overall effect to be realistic and satisfying, but
where I do not mind sacrificing the detailed minutia to do this.
This RQ4 draft rules set seems to be taking RQ along a Wargamer
simulate-everything-that-moves path. Unfortunately, I believe that in
the search for the holy grail of rules minutia and realism you can never
go too far - indeed I would argue that you can never stop. Trying to
simulate reality, and a weird reality of imagination and myth, is
ultimately impossible.
In essence my approach to RPG's is poles apart from the current draft.
WARNING! I have a nasty tendency to use "sarcasm". Sometimes this is to
illustrate a point I feel cannot be stressed in other ways. At other
times it is a sign of complete frustration.
Rules Design
Rules should be designed around the game world or genre. All the best
rules systems are customised to the genre. James Bond has Hero Points
and Seduction, Cthulhu has Sanity, and Pendragon has personality traits
and passions. When doing RQ4 some thought should be given to what is
being simulated: Glorantha. The rules should ooze Glorantha, something
that RQ3 never did, and that even RQ1/2 was never given enough freedom
to do.
Following on from the above, there are two ways RQ4 could have gone.
Firstly, it could have been an all-new rules system, involving a jump in
rules design and concept akin to that of Runequest to Pendragon.
Something designed purely with Glorantha in mind, perhaps something both
playable and fast-moving. Secondly, it could have been a rules update
and amendment - in computer jargon an RQ3.1. It would have a few minor
rules tweaks and changes, concentrating on those areas that over time
have been shown to be weak or just poorly explained. Something which
would be 90% recognisable and familiar to existing users.
In fact, the current RQ4 draft is neither of these. It is patently not
the former, and there is too little of the rules which has not been
replaced or changed for it to be the latter. It is in fact a new rules
system, because people will have to re-learn almost all of the rules.
This I feel is the worst outcome - it certainly isn't what was promised
or even mooted. RQers are going to feel confused and unfamiliar with
these new rules. Yet all the rules promise is a better way of doing
exactly the same thing. And for me, from what I can see, that way isn't
superior to RQ3.
I'm also worried that at Convulsion Ken Rolston stated that any changes
presented in the final RQ4 would not result in having to re-issue the
complete line of RQ supplements (apart from a few exceptions, which
included Maneouvre, fatigue and spirit combat). I don't think that
statement is born out by the rules draft I have seen. So is this draft
in some ways a draft for an RQ5 edition? Or is there a problem with the
original specification for the project? For that matter what is/was the
specification?
Lastly, is RQ seen as a direct rival to D&D? Is it aimed at the Lowest
Common Denominator? Is it now being designed to compete for that same
market? My firm belief (from my experience of UK players) is that
existing RQ players and GMs are more discriminating and sophisticated
than most RPG players, i.e. D&Ders. If you agree, then the rules should
be designed for discriminating and sophisticated people. Some common
sense being assumed, as well as a fair degree of role-playing
experience. To do otherwise risks alienating your market.
General Comments
I'd like to see some of the reasons (justifications?) behind many of the
rules changes. These are presented as the draft of the eventual rules
and it would be nice to know what the reasoning was behind the choice of
which rules to change, and the reasons for the specific changes.
Detailed Comments
DETERMINING CHARACTERISTICS
Some thought should be given to Glorantha-sising the characteristic
determination. Different cultures may have different modifiers to
characteristics, e.g. Lunars get +1 DEX & +1 POW to the rolled numbers.
See David Dunham's PenDragon Pass in issue #6 ofTales.
DAMAGE MODIFIER
I never perceived any problem with this table in RQ3. Why change it (and
make it longer)? For the sake of changing it? Or for mathematical
completeness? Too many minor/marginal/petty changes will alienate RQ3
players.
D2's are messy, as are +2 bonuses.
SKILLS CATEGORY MODIFIERS.
Agility. Seems like another marginal change.
Stealth. I dislike the idea of secondary negatives - especially as it
has to be added for just one category. The simplest alternative is to
drop POW as a negative factor.
PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE
I'm not sure about the approach here. The problem with giving characters
the choice of skills is that they choose the ones that make their shiny
swords work better and ignore the ones that they would logically learn
from their culture of birth. It tends to lead to unbalanced characters.
E.g. Orlanthi who can't jump, recite poetry or farm.
The previous system lead to balanced characters with the right number of
relevant skills and skill levels for their chosen occupation. Its only
real disadvantage was that it was only completely accurate up to the age
of 30 or 40. After that there were problems (the 80-year old farmer with
a lethal sword skill), for which some common sense was required to sort
out. I think the best approach is to iron out that problem rather than
embark on a whole new system.
If this system were used it would make redundant all the previous
experience sections in Elder Secrets, Glorantha, and Troll Pack. This
would probably require a reprint of those packs at a later date.
That said:
Why does a civilised guy get Scout (Terrain)? If it is Scout (Urban)
then why is it only +10%. Maybe it should be replaced with Streetwise
+20%?
Why does everybody from a Storyteller to a thief have basic combat
skills? Surely combat skills are only basic to soldiers in civilised
cultures, most professions in barbarian cultures, and everyone in
nomadic cultures. For anyone else, especially anyone civilised, they are
entirely optional. It should cost a storyteller or a merchant more to
purchase weapon skills.
Cultural Background
I think the Primitive, Nomad, Barbarian and Civilised cultures and
tables should be replaced with specific Gloranthan examples. e.g.
Rathorelan, Praxian, Orlanthi, Lunar. There is no longer such a need for
generic examples when you have Gloranthan ones available.
Magical Background
The ability to learn sorcery is very much linked to the sect of
Malkionism that the PC comes from. It depends on the attitude to castes,
parents, and movement within castes, etc.
Becoming an initiate.
Everyone in Glorantha is an initiate of a religion - their parents
religion. Every member (defined as 85% by Greg Stafford) of a Theyalan
Barbarian culture is initiated into the religion of Orlanth & Ernalda as
a part of their adulthood rites. Every child born to a Malkioni region
is baptised into the local sect of Malkionism. It is only later that
they may join an affiliated religion appropriate to their profession
(though this is usually the same one).
So, should it cost a background point?
SKILLS
My first impression is that there are a lot more. I'm against that. Once
you open the flood gates where do you stop?
Many of these skills should be secret cult skills, or secret society
skills. Such is the nature of Glorantha. They should be explored in the
cult write-ups and not in the basic rules. Or it should be explicitly
stated in their write-up that they can only be taught and/or learnt by
certain cults.
Easy, Medium, Hard, Very Hard and Very Very Hard skills are just added
complication and character sheet clutter. Why bother?
Acrobatics. There needs to be a skill like this but I'd argue that it is
a cult specific skill, a secret skill. It needs to be added to Donander
or the Puppeteer troop.
Balance and Breakfall. Again these are secret skills that should be part
of a cult or secret society. I don't think they're pertinent to put in
the main rules. The old generic DEX x 5 roll or Jump skill covered these
fine in RQ3. If you add all these myriad of skills for each eventuality
and discourage the use of the generic Characteristic roll you'll end up
with a "skill-dependency culture" - i.e. hundreds of obscure and weird
skills. OK for individual campaign, but for the basic rules...
March. Hmm... It seems a bit of an overkill to have a skill devoted to
one small part of the fatigue rules. Does the ability of a soldier to
experience less fatigue when marching come from being fitter and in
better physical shape, or having a skill in marching, i.e. knowing extra
tricks and techniques? Does this knowledge rise as slowly as skills do
in RQ? Does the use of the skill suffer from the complete success/abject
failure precipice which a percentile die success/fail roll leads to? Do
you either succeed or fail at, or is it something that when known can
always (or almost always) be applied?
My investigations of a couple of UK soldiers suggests it's more physical
fitness than any sort of skill. Nor should it be something that is
rolled for and that you can therefore "fail".
Couldn't a soldier just get a better CON multiplier instead? Or two CON
rolls instead of one? Or both?
Run. Again I think making a skill out of running isn't a good idea.
Running doesn't work like the RQ skill mechanism works. I don't know
enough about this, but I suspect there is some skill to running in terms
of breathing techniques and running style, but the majority of it is
physical fitness in the correct characteristics. Maybe 25% Skill and 75%
characteristics. The RQ skill system allows a distribution more like 80%
skill and 20% characteristics - with minuscule characteristic effect at
higher skill levels.
I reckon the fatigue aspects can be covered by some mix of CON and SIZ.
Speed can be a function of DEX and STR.
Also, bear in mind that most PC's tend to put their skill points into
neat magic and sharp pointed things. Most will not put anything into
Run. However in my experience PC's also tend to spent every spare waking
minute training their characteristics up like hell.
So you can have the situation where there are all these mega-high CON
PC's, who've been on loads of runs to get their CON up, but under these
rules they can't run for two minutes without falling over and throwing
up with exhaustion. While the 95% runner with STR 3, CON 3, SIZ 18 & DEX
3 cruises past them at Mach 4, and runs half-way around the continent of
Genertela without drawing breath.
Well, maybe that's what happens in your Glorantha...
Act. Donander & Thief cult skill
Beg & Bribe. Can't these can be subsumed into the Fast Talk skill?
Debate. A Knowledge God special skill? Frankly in a Fantasy game its
function can quite adequately be covered by Fast Talk, Orate and a bit
of role-play.
Intimidate. Is it really necessary to have a skill like this? It's just
another skill that limits role-play. Intimidating situations are what
GM's and players do best.
I don't know about you lot but to me it's beginning to look like this:
RuneQuest: the SPG (Skill Playing Game)
Hey, you know what we really need is a "Make Joke" skill. Hmm... then
we'd need "Tell Joke" and "Comic Timing". Or perhaps it should be Craft
Satirical Joke, Craft Slapstick Joke, etc...?
Of course, as Greg Stafford suggests, we will then need a Appreciate
Joke skill.
What do you think?
Sing. Another skill that the RQ mechanics fail to make believable. Under
the current rules 90% of the population sing like Lee Marvin. I'd
suggest the base skill be put up to 25 or 30%. Or allow everyone to roll
a d100 randomly for their starting skill.
Administrate. Hmm... do we have to? Mostly a useless and unplayable
skill.
Now, I realise that one reason for all these new skills is to allow
NPC's to be defined by them. But I think this its a bit of an overkill.
It is possibly better done by writing up a decent character profile of
the NPC. Saying such things as "He is an incompetent administrator" or
"He has a large and intimidating presence". I'd much prefer, as a GM, to
role-play an incompetent administrator rather than have my life ruled by
die rolls, and risk the embarrassment of rolling a critical success
against Administrate 5%. It just seems a long and verbose way round the
problem.
Battle. You need to add that Battle cannot be researched (how can you
research savvy?) and that only war cults can train people.
There is a case for a whole new section in the rules on Battles and
related skills. Akin to the Pendragon system approach.
Craft. You may want to add Farming and Animal Husbandry to the list.
Are you dodging the alchemy rules with this skill? Are there no base
alchemical skills that you need before you can learn Craft (Blade
Venom)?
Did you see that Greg Stafford wanted Blade venom out of the rules - see
Tales #5, Notes to Alebard's Quest?
Hawking. What's this doing here? Well... if you've got this in then
please add my fave skills of Fox Hunting, Badger Baiting, and Cock-
fighting. It's just not a relevant skill to describe in the basic rules.
Intrigue. Same comments as Administrate apply.
Martial Arts. Yup, and there's a Martial Arts Training centre in every
village. Needs to be limited to the East, or to a cult or secret
society. I hate the idea of it being introduced so early on, in the
basic rules.
Memorize. Secret Knowledge God skill?
Treat Disease and Poison. Chalana Arroy cult skills.
Set & Disarm Traps etc. I preferred the old Devise rules. Smacks of D&D
to have all the PC's running around with this skill on their character
sheets.
Pickpocket & Pick Locks. These should be craft skills. Or else surely
Craft Basketweaving should be a Manipulation skill?
Drive (Vehicle). Only worshippers of Mastakos or Lokarnos can get
training for this.
Escape. I don't like the name. Foil Restraints is far clearer in
meaning. Escape is too wide a term. Again a specialist skill.
Fast Draw. Special cult secret skill. Dragonewt?
Feel, Taste & Smell. If you are going to go the whole way on this you
should replace the Search and Scan skills with See & Hear.
Lip Read, Mimic, Juggle, Ventriloquism are really obscure special skills
that need not be explored in the rules book.
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:27:54 EEST