Mongoose & Runequest

[Akrasia]

... Time to dump my Conan stuff, I guess. I simply cannot stomach Runequest myself...

What a foolish thing to say!

Why would future Runequest Conan material render your existing Conan OGL stuff unusuable?
:\

 

[Akrasia]

Not that I've seen the new one, but if someone had asked me, out of the dozens of systems I'd played, which most felt like Conan, I'd have probably said old-school RuneQuest.

I agree. 2e Runequest (with a different magic system) would fit amazingly well.

 

[Nebulous]

I used to have the old Runequest boxed sets back in the day, but sold them years ago. Now, for someone in the know, is the new system pretty much a rehash of the same thing in a shiny new package, or are there some substantial changes to the system? Like the 2e to 3e conversion?

Personally, i'm sort of tired of the D&D spell system, even with innovations like Arcana Evolved and True Sorcery (although both of those are great). I keep hoping something will come along that hits the spot with me.

 

[Nebulous]

Also, future Mongoose Conan material will be for RQ, not d20.

It seems like they would need to completely redo the core Conan book to achieve this. That might attract some people, but more than likely seems it would split the fan base.

 

[Melkor]

Actually, this is a rumor at this point. Mongoose has said that no decision has been reached. It's been debated over on the Mongoose forums with the anti-D20 & RQ-fanboys squealing in delight at the possibility while the die-hard Conan fans (as opposed to D20) are voicing their displeasure as loudly as possible.

Azgulor

Nice post Azgulor. :\

The guys who don't like D20, or who do like Runequest are automatically labeled as 'fanboys'....and you also make statement that every "die-hard Conan fans (as opposed to D20)" is displeased about the possibility of a Runequest Conan, which is completely erroneus. Several of the Conan fans over on the Mongoose forums (including myself) think that Mongoose's Runequest could be a great fit.

I happen to be playing in two Conan D20 campaigns right now and having a blast.

I love the Conan setting.

I would also love to see a Runequest version of Conan.

I would personally be happy with them continuing the D20 line and dual-statting material, or continuing the D20 line, and making PDFs available with converted RQ info

 

[Melkor]

I used to have the old Runequest boxed sets back in the day, but sold them years ago. Now, for someone in the know, is the new system pretty much a rehash of the same thing in a shiny new package, or are there some substantial changes to the system? Like the 2e to 3e conversion?

Check out the preview PDFs here:

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/series.php?qsSeries=39

(scroll down a bit)

Most folks who see the character sheet think it's terrible, but a couple of forum posters on the Mongoose Forums have already created their own sheets which are much better.

Since Mongoose doesn't have a license to use Chaosium's BRP system, the new Runequest is actually a similar system, but not entirely the same as the original RQ. A few of the features of the new RQ that I am really looking forward to (that are different from the original RQ as far as I can recall - it's been a long time since I played it) are:

• A random element added to initiative with the roll of a D10 added to the character's Strike Rank (where Strike Rank was a fixed number in the original RQ).

• All skill base chances looked to be based on the characters Ability Scores instead of most of them being a fixed number in the original RQ.

• Preview 4 seems to show a page or two of abilities that resemble 'Feats' or 'Edges', which is something that the original RQ didn't include.

Hope that helps answer your question.

 

[Nebulous]

Hope that helps answer your question.

It does. Thanks. I suppose it is inevitable for some 3rd edition D&D innovations to work it's way in, so long as they leave out AoO!

 

[Melkor]

It does. Thanks. I suppose it is inevitable for some 3rd edition D&D innovations to work it's way in, so long as they leave out AoO!

From what I understand, miniature use is not something that is required to utilize the combat options in RQ, but you can definitely use miniatures if you want (which makes me think that there won't be any rules like Attacks of Opportunity).

As a disclaimer, I'm not 100% sure about that because I wasn't in on the playtest, and I haven't seen anything more than the previews.

 

[argo]

Also, future Mongoose Conan material will be for RQ, not d20.

Yea, as others have said this is nothing more than a rumor at this point.

Though based on a few things Mongoose Mat has said it does appear that some mixture of the RQ and Conan properties is inevetible...

My guess is we will see a RQ Conan source book and if that does well then there is the possibility of future supplements being dual-statted. I just can't imagine Mongoose dumping the d20 Conan line seing as how they have always been so attentive to customer service. :\

 

[Azgulor]

Nice post Azgulor. :\

The guys who don't like D20, or who do like Runequest are automatically labeled as 'fanboys'....and you also make statement that every "die-hard Conan fans (as opposed to D20)" is displeased about the possibility of a Runequest Conan, which is completely erroneus. Several of the Conan fans over on the Mongoose forums (including myself) think that Mongoose's Runequest could be a great fit.

I happen to be playing in two Conan D20 campaigns right now and having a blast.

I love the Conan setting.

I would also love to see a Runequest version of Conan.

I would personally be happy with them continuing the D20 line and dual-statting material, or continuing the D20 line, and making PDFs available with converted RQ info

To each his own, pal.

Nothing in my post precludes a middle ground for fans of both games. Since the obvious appears to need stating:

The RQ "fanboys" would be the camp that make purely subjective statements presented as fact regarding their perceived flaws of D20 games, countering with how RQ is a better thematic fit - another subjective position stated as fact. Furthermore, they frequently attribute D&Disms to the Conan RPG which, although based on the D20 engine, plays significantly differently than D&D and default-D20 games. This combination places them in the Fanboy camp (in my opinion).

The Conan "diehards" (such as myself) like the Conan RPG and do not want to see it's ongoing support sacrificed in favor of a RQ version of the game. Few of the posts I've seen trash RQ as a system, rather they voice the opinion "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Since the debate has been ongoing for several days now, with 13 pages (last time I checked) in the Conan forum and multiple pages in the RuneQuest forum, I think I can say that the majority of posts fall into the two camps I've defined.

The previously unidentified "middle ground" fans such as yourself seem to like Conan OGL but are open to a RQ version of Conan as well. Happy now?

If the RQ fans were taking your approach or saying why they think RQ were a better fit without tearing down the Conan RPG there would be less vitriol on both sides. Coming from the "Conan Diehard" camp I must say that listening to subjective D20-bashing in the forum dedicated to the Conan OGL RPG gets old after a while.

Azgulor