Skyrim. . .Inspired by Runequest??

[vladtolenkov]

There was a thread on rpg.net where the question was posed: what tabletop rpg system would work best to give the feel of Skyrim? Many folks thought that Runequest/Basic Roleplaying would work quite well. I have to say that I thought that was a great answer, but I also noticed another connection:

The Empire/Stormcloak rebellion thing in Skyrim is a bit like the tensions between the Lunar Empire and the Heortlings in Dragon Pass isn't it? So does Skyrim=Dragon Pass?

Also, the skill system is based around improving them by using them and that's an essential element of Runequest's system as well. I guess this type of system existed in earlier Elder Scrolls games, but Runequest is one of the progenitors of that kind of advancement.

Am I totally off base here with these connections? Anybody more familiar with Skyrim please feel free to throw in here.

[foxroe]

Nope. In fact the last three ES games are very much like RQ. But I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that the lead designer for the previous two ES games was Ken Rolston.

[vladtolenkov]

That's very interesting.

In what ways does the Elder Scrolls, as a whole, draw from Runequest?

[foxroe]

Well, you sort of already hit on it. While the ES system is certainly not entirely like RQ (or any other game for that matter), it does borrow some elements.

Unlike RQ, the ES systems have been "level" based; however, rather than a direct X-experience=Y-level relationship, experience is earned by using your skills, and improvement in skills leads to increasing level. In RQ, skills are improved through use (just as in ES), but there are no "levels." Despite this, though, when you find yourself trying to compare the relative degree of power between a player character and say a monster or NPC, you tend to look at how improved the skill percentages are to determine that degree. One could argue that this is essentially the same as what the ES "level"-based system is trying to achieve.

Also, while Skyrim characters are no longer tied to character class archetypes like in the earlier ES games, these systems didn't restrict characters of a particular class from improving the skills associated with other classes. This sort of reminds me of the RQ system of utilizing cultural backgrounds and profession packages to boost specific skills at the start of the game, but then not preventing characters from improving any skill during play.

You can also draw similarities in the magic systems. Both are "magic point" based with respect to the energy required to cast a spell. Spells can be upscaled/redesigned in ES, and spells in RQ can have their range/duration/effect manipulated. Magic items are "easily" created and are generally unique in both systems. etc.

[vladtolenkov]

The leveling system in Skyrim/ES sounds almost like a vestigial limb rather than something that meaningfully drives play. They could easily drop it and fully Runequestify the system if they wanted. I imagine they've kept it as it reflects what console gamers are expecting to see--A leveling system. The skills are clearly the important thing though (as in RQ).

Your right the archetypes sound very similar to the "previous experience" packages from Runequest (2nd edition), the Class Backgrounds in Stormbringer, or the Occupations in Call of Cthulhu.

I've been rereading my copy of Runequest and itching to run a game. I could probably sell it to my players as a Skyrim flavored campaign (although we're just into running OD&D right now, and so it would be a few months before we played).

[vladtolenkov]

Do you know what RQ supplements Ken worked on?

[ckutalik]

Wow I actually didn't know he had such a leading role in ES. Learn something every day.

Dec 23, 2011 9:47:53 GMT -6 vladtolenkov said:

Do you know what RQ supplements Ken worked on?

He had a byline on the first three editions of the RQ rulebook. Supplements wise I think he was on Pavis, Borderlands, River of Cradles, and Doraster.

[foxroe]

Dec 23, 2011 9:46:35 GMT -6 vladtolenkov said:

The leveling system in Skyrim/ES sounds almost like a vestigial limb rather than something that meaningfully drives play. They could easily drop it and fully Runequestify the system if they wanted. I imagine they've kept it as it reflects what console gamers are expecting to see--A leveling system. The skills are clearly the important thing though (as in RQ).

I think you're right for the most part. I wouldn't necessarily call the leveling system "vestigial" since a lot of the behind the scenes game mechanics rely on the player character's level (i.e. better available items, tougher encounters, etc.)

As far as RQ goes though, I would totally scavenge every bit of the ES for sweet RQ campaign!

[vladtolenkov]

ckutalik--I'm looking at my Chaosium 2nd edition Runequest and I don't see Ken's name. You're talking about the Avalon Hill edition, correct?

Foxroe--that's a nifty idea! I was thinking of using Skyrim as a way to sell the RQ idea to my players, but I think that using the ES as inspiration for a RQ campaign is a really intriguing approach. I'll post if something comes of that.

[premmy]

I recall reading somewhere a long time ago that the world of Tamriel (the setting of the Elder Scrolls games) originally arose from the RPG campaign of some of the first game's creators. Now, I've read this long ago, but as far as I remember, it was actually a D&D campaign, not Runequest.


Perhaps more relevantly, I think two issues ought to be considered here: the matter of the setting, and the matter of the ruleset.

The setting. It's obviously based on D&D, with the various elf races all being the basic D&D subraces with a few twists. It's also got orcs, dwarves (even if not as a playable race), and a slew of other D&D staples.

Rules. If you're familiar with the earlier games and their character creation procedures, you'll also see that even though they have a large number classes, it's all rather firmly based on D&D assumptions. They're based on the fourfold division of Fighter, Thief, Magic User and Cleric (here, as a subset of wizards); and almost all classes in Arena and Daggerfall are either one-to-one copies of AD&D classes or the functional equivalents of multiclass combos.

In fact, you couldn't create your own class in Arena, but had to choose from the presets via a question-and-answer session. In my eyes, this is an obvious sign that the original system inspiration was not Runequest with its skills, but D&D with its classes.

In fact, I'll postulate that TES games evolved their skill-based system because the designers were aware of one of the golden rules of RPG design (at least until Morrowind - the last two games I consider to be inferior in terms of ruleset): "When making a computer RPG, play to the strengths computers have over humans; when making pnp, play to the strengths humans have over computers." A CPU has no problem keeping track of numerous skills and the frequency and success rate of their use - but try to do the same in a pnp game, and you end up with copious amounts of bookkeeping and players spuriously and disingenuously trying to use every single skill in every single session to get a chance at levelling them up.

Just as a computer can't and shouldn't try to simulate the freedom of pnp roleplaying, so can't a pnp game simulate the mechanical complexities a computer game is easily capable of. Therefore, I strongly suggest that instead of trying to find a close match for the system (and, ignoring the inherent differences between the two media, inevitably failing to recapture the feel of the games), one should use a system that hews closer to the original roots of the setting. Old school D&D should be able to do this perfectly, and it can be modified to incluse various skills systems (just look at Stars Without Number for one example) with relative ease.

[bert]

There was a Morrowind mod that did get rid of levels and just had skills, though it went along Rolemaster lines and had skills related to your class easier to increase than non-class. Took a bit of jiggery pokery behind the scenes to work out a 'virtual level' to keep the rest of the games challenge/reward systems happy though.

Which brings me to a weakness of the Elder Scrolls games - the fact that challenges are always adjusted to meet player level, no matter where you are. This annoys me. I know that any dungeon I go in to bash will be doable, and the rewards dull but OK. There is little feeling of progress as a result. In Oblivion for example you wade into a Goblin infested mine at 1st level, take them out after a tough fight or two. At 20th level, the same mine has 20th level goblins, the fight is just as tough, you use the same tactics, gain a bit more gold and few jazzier magic items, but it's weak. The decision I make as to which quests are worth following now and which to leave for later, and what degree of risk I am willing to take for what kind of reward is taken away from me, it is all the same.

And book-keeping for skill based games is not actually a big deal, as any RQ/CoC/BRP aficionado will tell you. You do sometimes get wannabe Runelords trying for a tick in every skill they can shoehorn in any given session. My usual GM strategy is that unless a player definitely tells me that his player is doing THIS right NOW, I rule that the best skilled person in the party does the task.

For example: 'We search the room' - best player Spot Hidden is used, if he can't find it, no one can so we don't have a queue of power gamers all queueing up to make their roll, slowing down the action. 'Mulgren the Mighty has a look under the table' Mulgren rolls his Spot Hidden for the thing under the table, if he fails, and no one else says 'I take a look under the table', or 'Sod it, lets just turn the whole place over ' - back to best skill does the job again - the thing under there is not found.

[ckutalik]

Dec 30, 2011 23:29:21 GMT -6 bert said:

Which brings me to a weakness of the Elder Scrolls games - the fact that challenges are always adjusted to meet player level, no matter where you are. This annoys me. I know that any dungeon I go in to bash will be doable, and the rewards dull but OK. There is little feeling of progress as a result. In Oblivion for example you wade into a Goblin infested mine at 1st level, take them out after a tough fight or two. At 20th level, the same mine has 20th level goblins, the fight is just as tough, you use the same tactics, gain a bit more gold and few jazzier magic items, but it's weak. The decision I make as to which quests are worth following now and which to leave for later, and what degree of risk I am willing to take for what kind of reward is taken away from me, it is all the same.

That drove me bonkers--a trend copied by Dragon Age where the encounters would scale up too--it verges on a gamebreaker for me. If every site on the map is powered up and down to be at your appropriate level then the sandbox to some extent is just an illusion.

[vladtolenkov]

ckutalik wrote:

That drove me bonkers--a trend copied by Dragon Age where the encounters would scale up too--it verges on a gamebreaker for me. If every site on the map is powered up and down to be at your appropriate level then the sandbox to some extent is just an illusion.

From what I know of Skyrim (again I haven't yet played it)--this may no longer be the case. I've heard multiple people warn players against taking on the giants too soon as you will end up a bloody corpse flying into the upper atmosphere (that's how hard they hit people with their clubs).

Can anybody who has played Skyrim tell us whether the encounters scale as was mentioned above?

[premmy]

They do. It's less blatant than it was in Oblivion, but still quite a but more widespread than in Morrowind.

[foxroe]

Jan 2, 2012 17:01:28 GMT -6 premmy said:

They do. It's less blatant than it was in Oblivion, but still quite a but more widespread than in Morrowind.

I'll plus one that.

I haven't played it much, but it's sort of "old school" in the sense that there are encounters out there that you shouldn't be attempting at level 1. But then those same encounters become easier at higher levels; however, the game starts to spawn tougher challenges for you as well. Hmmm... sounds like a certain game we all know and love.

(I've also been talking to my son who has completed the game and then some and he confirmed my assessment.)

[vladtolenkov]

This has all got me thinking about the differences between running a classic D&D sandbox and running a Runequest sandbox or semi-sandbox.

I had an intensive discussion about how to set up a RQ campaign over at Story Games a few months ago, but I think I'll start a new thread about these other RQ related topics, and we can keep this one about Skyrim-ES-RQ stuff.

[bert]

Now that I've had a chance to play it, Skyrim does seem to at least run parallel to Glorantha and the plot of the Hero Wars in a few places -

Vaguely Viking/Celtic people in conflict with Pseudo Roman Empire

Ancient dragon-worshipping culture revival (Empire of the Wyrm's Friends stuff used by Argrath)

Unique dragon magic different from anything else

Soul storage crystals

And some older Elder Scrolls games do use -

Customisable sorcery spells

Easy to make magic items

Power crystals (Welkynd stones).

It would be nice to know how many of the designers had read or played RQ, but I suspect it's more use of similar source material and inspiration than a direct rip off.