Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Elephant in the room: rogue and fighter dailies.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="nnms" data-source="post: 5927641" data-attributes="member: 83293"><p>They were publishing it. Now they publish a version of the rules called Legend which is runequest with the runequest filed off. It's actually a nice little set of rules. RuneQuest 6 is coming out later this year, hopefully in the next couple months or so. It's the same designers that did MRQ/Legend, but published through another company and with more dials and knobs when it comes to the strange magic systems that RQ has.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As you can see from this thread, people like to fight on the internet. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I was playing 4E and running it a lot. But I was missing an approach to gaming that I didn't really connect with RuneQuest at the time. One person I wanted involved in the game told me they didn't want to learn a new system, so that was part of it. So I started snipping and cutting and replacing. It still looked a lot like 4E, but it had a pretty massive change in terms of how resources were refreshed. We played a few sessions, had a blast, but the group wanted to get back to the main campaign (we didn't convert the main campaign over because some players new it was probably going to be deadlier and base 4E is pretty easy not to die in).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah. I'm not sure what to think about that. I guess at its core, D&D started off as being about going into a dangerous place, surviving and coming out with gold and glory. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There's also a ton of world building that goes on in character creation. Also, the reward cycle has nothing to do with "winning" in RQ. Whatever the results, you have your improvement rolls on the things you did. You don't need to get XP by killing monsters. And with wounds taking people out of the fight often more than outright killing, NPCs can stick around a bit more.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Running skill challenges in a less binary way is one of the factors that led me back to wanting emergent play. While I like the idea of stake setting and meta elements to failures and successes, I found the best skill challenges where the ones where we essentially resorted back to describe-react-redescribe circuit play. As long as everyone keeps describing things that actually pursue a given goal, you can get there without much of a fuss.</p><p></p><p>Another way I used them was that I overtly gave players stake setting power. Where they could state literally any goal and go after it and then we'd start. But even then, it became an issue of the narration during the skill challenge not really mattering nearly as much as the die rolls and the final binary outcome.</p><p></p><p>I think meta level declarations on success or failure like you are doing work better than a binary approach.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Kill monsters and take their stuff. In my Basic D&D game, we're only in the caves to get rich, to make a name for ourselves and to rid the countryside of monsters. I have fond dreams of a another dimension of play (my character's knighting and entry into politics) but that's not going to happen. </p><p></p><p>I like how the playtest module talks about various ways of getting people interested in going to the caves as if that matters. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /> The playtest and the module are both about exploring some caves, killing some monsters and getting some loot. People may talk about how KotBL is actually about turning various monster factions against one another, negotiation, etc., but all that is still done just to make some monsters die and line the pockets of the PCs with gold. And there really is nothing in the rules of either Basic D&D or the playtest to hang that sort of stuff on anyway.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I guess they're hoping it'll turn out good by accident.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think that stuff is really going to come at all.</p><p></p><p>I really am beginning to think that they are relying on the playtesters to create the modularity for them. That commonly talked about house rules on their forums and through other feed back channels will be taken, cleaned up and made into the modules. I don't think the design team is actually going to think about different dials and settings and take the time to write modules any time soon.</p><p></p><p>I think 5E is basically going to be a stripped down 3.x with a buffet table of house rules passed off as modularity designed to produce specific play types. </p><p></p><p>So why would they create a nice metaresource based resolution system to produce multidemensional complications? It's not like your use of skill challenges to do that was widely spread among 4E players. Is it even on the design team's radar? I think they've been spending too much time playing AD&D to think more about possible skill challenge uses. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="nnms, post: 5927641, member: 83293"] They were publishing it. Now they publish a version of the rules called Legend which is runequest with the runequest filed off. It's actually a nice little set of rules. RuneQuest 6 is coming out later this year, hopefully in the next couple months or so. It's the same designers that did MRQ/Legend, but published through another company and with more dials and knobs when it comes to the strange magic systems that RQ has. As you can see from this thread, people like to fight on the internet. :p I was playing 4E and running it a lot. But I was missing an approach to gaming that I didn't really connect with RuneQuest at the time. One person I wanted involved in the game told me they didn't want to learn a new system, so that was part of it. So I started snipping and cutting and replacing. It still looked a lot like 4E, but it had a pretty massive change in terms of how resources were refreshed. We played a few sessions, had a blast, but the group wanted to get back to the main campaign (we didn't convert the main campaign over because some players new it was probably going to be deadlier and base 4E is pretty easy not to die in). Yeah. I'm not sure what to think about that. I guess at its core, D&D started off as being about going into a dangerous place, surviving and coming out with gold and glory. There's also a ton of world building that goes on in character creation. Also, the reward cycle has nothing to do with "winning" in RQ. Whatever the results, you have your improvement rolls on the things you did. You don't need to get XP by killing monsters. And with wounds taking people out of the fight often more than outright killing, NPCs can stick around a bit more. Running skill challenges in a less binary way is one of the factors that led me back to wanting emergent play. While I like the idea of stake setting and meta elements to failures and successes, I found the best skill challenges where the ones where we essentially resorted back to describe-react-redescribe circuit play. As long as everyone keeps describing things that actually pursue a given goal, you can get there without much of a fuss. Another way I used them was that I overtly gave players stake setting power. Where they could state literally any goal and go after it and then we'd start. But even then, it became an issue of the narration during the skill challenge not really mattering nearly as much as the die rolls and the final binary outcome. I think meta level declarations on success or failure like you are doing work better than a binary approach. Kill monsters and take their stuff. In my Basic D&D game, we're only in the caves to get rich, to make a name for ourselves and to rid the countryside of monsters. I have fond dreams of a another dimension of play (my character's knighting and entry into politics) but that's not going to happen. I like how the playtest module talks about various ways of getting people interested in going to the caves as if that matters. :p The playtest and the module are both about exploring some caves, killing some monsters and getting some loot. People may talk about how KotBL is actually about turning various monster factions against one another, negotiation, etc., but all that is still done just to make some monsters die and line the pockets of the PCs with gold. And there really is nothing in the rules of either Basic D&D or the playtest to hang that sort of stuff on anyway. I guess they're hoping it'll turn out good by accident. I don't think that stuff is really going to come at all. I really am beginning to think that they are relying on the playtesters to create the modularity for them. That commonly talked about house rules on their forums and through other feed back channels will be taken, cleaned up and made into the modules. I don't think the design team is actually going to think about different dials and settings and take the time to write modules any time soon. I think 5E is basically going to be a stripped down 3.x with a buffet table of house rules passed off as modularity designed to produce specific play types. So why would they create a nice metaresource based resolution system to produce multidemensional complications? It's not like your use of skill challenges to do that was widely spread among 4E players. Is it even on the design team's radar? I think they've been spending too much time playing AD&D to think more about possible skill challenge uses. :erm: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Elephant in the room: rogue and fighter dailies.
Top