|
|
Post by Finarvyn on May 19, 2010 16:30:10 GMT -6
Can anyone simplify the editions and/or explain the differences in the different RQ-like games out there?
RUNEQUEST
* Chaosium RQ (1E and 2E)
* Avalon Hill RQ (3E)
* Mongoose RQ (I and II)
GENERIC
* BRP
* GORE
SPECIFIC SETTINGS
* Call of Cthulhu
* Elric / Hawkmoon / Corum
* Lankhmar (Fafhrd & the Grey Mouser)
Seems to me like all of these games are (1) skill based, (2) percentile dice based, (3) designed so that any character can use magic, and (4) very similar in terms of mechanics.
Any real differences from one game system to the other, or could I basically generate a character in one system and import it into another with minimal effort?
|
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on May 19, 2010 18:06:11 GMT -6
I'll have to lay out the differences between RQ1 and RQ2 at some point.
A major difference between RQ and most of the others is hit locations. RQ3 also has different calculations for hit points per location than RQ1 and RQ2. There are other combat system differences (not sure how all the systems handle parry and dodge for example). There may be differences in damage ranges for weapons. There are some differences in armor (RQ1 has a maximum of 8 points of armor in a location, RQ2 increases that for some hit locations due to overlapping armor, RQ3 has a slightly different scale).
There are major differences between RQ1/2 and RQ3 in how cults work and the benefits they give.
In general, especially for NPCs, it's easy to move characters between games. For PCs it might be trickier because of differences in skill ranges for starting characters. Use the equipment and combat rules from a single source as much as possible (CoC guns might be ported over to one of the other systems for one example of an exception).
Magic is of course different between different settings.
That's some quick off the top differences.
Frank
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on May 20, 2010 4:28:29 GMT -6
Frank, you are a great resource. Thanks for the synopsis. Funny that I have all these cool games on my shelf but have never really played them enough to remember the differences between one and another. (The settings are distinct in my brain, but the rules blur together.)
|
|
|
|
Post by stevemitchell on May 20, 2010 9:58:49 GMT -6
Games Workshop released a version of RuneQuest in the UK, I believe. Does anyone know if this was RQ 2E or 3E? Did Games Workshop make any changes of their own to the rules?
|
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on May 20, 2010 12:05:07 GMT -6
I'm pretty sure Games Workshop released both RQ2 and RQ3. I think both were offered in hardback also, which was never done by Chaosium or Avalon Hill.
Frank
|
|
|
|
Post by uncruliar on May 20, 2010 12:13:29 GMT -6
Chaosium's RQ2 was published by Games Workshop under license. RQ3 was published by Avalon Hill, so far as I know it was not released by GW but was imported. However I may be wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on May 20, 2010 12:28:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by uncruliar on May 20, 2010 12:40:23 GMT -6
Looks like I was wrong ;D This is the cover of RQ2 as released in the UK by GW under license. It is very similar to the Chaosium version Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by stevemitchell on May 20, 2010 15:10:44 GMT -6
Thanks, guys. RQ2 in hardback would be very nice to have.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2010 16:20:44 GMT -6
Wonder what their artwork looked like. GW has a knack for really strange spiked-hair dwarves and pony-tailed orcs. (At least their Warhammer miniatures games are full of that stuff.)
|
|
|
|
Post by uncruliar on May 21, 2010 1:38:11 GMT -6
There's not a whole lot of artwork in the RQ2 rulebook, but it is by Luise Perrin. Cults of Prax, also published in the UK under license, has artwork by Luise Perrin and Steve Swenston, who were part of the RQ team from the start, and a few other names that I don't recognise. I think they basically used the Chaosium artwork.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Aug 20, 2015 7:17:30 GMT -6
This is what a proper Games Workshop RQ2 cover looks like.  |
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Oct 4, 2018 15:42:59 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Oct 12, 2018 5:16:31 GMT -6
If you include the setting-specific games, magic will be very different from Runeqest. Sorcery in Stormbringer is about summoning and binding demons, elementals, etc. Not everyone can become a sorcerer; only those with a combined INT + POW score of 32 or higher qualify. Spells may have been included in later editions, but I only have the original.
Magic in Elfquest is telepathic/psionic in nature and limited to elves. Different tribes have different abilities, particularly bonding with certain animals or shaping materials. Most elves can communicate telepathically ("Sending").
|
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on May 27, 2020 21:05:47 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on May 27, 2020 21:06:31 GMT -6
I finally got around to finishing this. So here, I present my paragraph by paragraph comparison of RQ1 and RQ2. There are actually more differences than I realized, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised: docs.google.com/document/d/1Pi8aJ_LNuXXl9b-OrwrtTi4BpGSexKxxIguJqThnW1U/edit?usp=sharing As I went through the comparison, I noted a bunch of things I'd actually prefer the RQ2 rules for, so I suppose I really will end up with RQ1.5... Another big item of note is that the RQ2 Shaman is much more playable than the RQ1 Shaman. I also found a few more spell differences than noted above (including Rune Spell differences). |
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jun 16, 2020 10:47:34 GMT -6
Chaosium has expressed displeasure with my comparison document. At the moment it's still public, but if I don't resolve something with them, I will have to take it private. If you are interested in the document, please go to the document and request comment access and I will add you and then you will continue to be able to see it even if I have to take it private. Unfortunately it's impossible to do such a comparison document and follow their guidelines, so maybe they will find a way for it to still be available, but I'm guessing not...
Frank
|
|
