New RuneQuest is Named: "RUNEQUEST: ROLEPLAYING IN GLORANTHA"

Chaosium has just announced the name of the upcoming edition of RuneQuest, due for a Christmas 2017 release. This edition will not be called RuneQuest 4, or RuneQuest 7 (depending how you choose to count them), but will be called "RuneQuest: Roleplaying in Glorantha" (or RQG). This edition is descended from the 2nd Edition ruleset, and is compatible with the RuneQuest Classic reprints which Chaosium recently Kickstarted.

Not only that, Chaosium confirms that RQG will not appear on Kickstarter. Rick Meints of Chaosium says "If we Kickstarted the new RQ, the campaign wouldn't be able to be launched until September at the earliest, and if there had been stretch goals the first books would probably not be out until the middle of 2018. In our new timeline we'll have three RQG titles out by the end of the year, followed by additional items every month or two after that."

So what's the product schedule looking like? The core rules come out this year, as does the Gloranthan Bestiary, and a book of adventures. These will be followed by 6 products per year. Meints says "We are building up a RQ product pipeline that will release 6 products per year, at a pace of a book every other month on average. Big gaps between new product coming out sap the momentum".

You can also expect to see the RuneQuest Quickstart in June for Free RPG Day and in July for feree on Chaosium's website.

SaveSave​

 

[Jeff Richard]

D&D and the various BRP games (CoC and RQ) had a very different history of development (and proceed from very different basic assumptions) and so that phrase likely has a very different meaning if you are looking at it from the BRP perspective as opposed to the D&D perspective. BRP has always put the adventurer's abilities on the character sheet. If no listed ability seems appropriate to the task at hand, then look at whatever characteristic seems appropriate. When a player can't find problem-solving tools on their character sheet, they won't look elsewhere for them. So make those tools available to them on the character sheet (and don't hide problem-solving tools in class descriptions or level benefits or whatever).

As for if an activity isn't emphasized in the rule book, players don't do it, that's again based on long experience with BRP rules systems. KAP puts passions like Honor, Loyalty, etc., into the rules because doing so serves notice to the GM and the players that those concepts are important - and they incentive roleplaying. That's not to say players won't roleplay their characters as honorable or loyal without that (those are pretty base concepts in the fantasy genre), but we're also all familiar with the trope of the murder-hobo. Incentive the things you want to encourage. If you don't, for many gamemasters and players, you as a designer have said that activity is not important in gameplay. Again, that's based on the experiences of Ken, Greg, Sandy, Steve, and Chris as game designers, all of whom have been around the block a few times. Again, D&D has had a different set of issues with this (but also approaches what a character can do differently from the BRP games).

 

[mach1.9pants]

Hi!

As an aside, a good percentage of rules in any Chaosium game are more of what you might call "guidelines" than actual rules.

Hi Jeff, and thanks for coming onto ENW to chat. Welcome! I can see what you are saying but I just disagree with the premise. The way we play all games at my place is different. We think of what the PC would or could do, consistent with the situation they are in, and then see if any rules apply. Obviously a lot of the time we know exactly what rules we are talking about and so there are lots of the other way (your way) around - casting spells for ex. But when looking for ideas we think of 'what would my character do?' rather than 'what does it say on my sheet?'. To me that is the big difference between a RPG and other types of games, you are not constrained by what's written down.

Your design philosophy doesn't really stop me playing d100 games, we just play it differently. There is no badwrongfun and I'm still excited by what you guys come up with. I am on with ensuring that important things are in the rules, just not the 'look at your sheet for inspiration'.

If there are no rules we make 'em up! And they're mostly what you call guidelines anyway

Thanks again for engaging here on ENWorld.

 

[Brandegoris]

This is GREAT News. Greg Stafford is am Amazing creative genius ( as the Glorantha setting shows). Any game played in that setting is destined for greatness.

I CAN say with certitude that Greg Stafford does NOT adhere to the " if its not on the character sheet its not important" game plenty style. if a Player thinks outside the Box and comes up with something he will literally make it a rule on the spot ( if its appropriate of course).