[RQ-Rules] Non-Gloranthan Bestiaries

[Stephen Posey]

Gianni wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I was wondering... Apparently a lot of you guys on the list play RQ in
> Non-Gloranthan settings. The problem is -- What kind of creatures do you
> use?
> 
> I feel the creatures in RQII and most of the creatures in RQIII are
> intrinsically linked to Glorantha and don't make much of a sense used
> outside of that peculiar context. And rightly so, since I believe creatures
> must be closely linked to a given setting's atmosphere, unless you favour a
> D&Dish approach to role playing. So what kind of creatures do you use? Do
> you have to write up your own?
> 
> I was disappointed by Land of Ninja, for instance, in which most of the
> creatures descriptions simply state 'this is the Nihonese version of the
> creature...'
> 
> Also the Gateway Bestiary isn't particularly useful since most of the
> creatures in it are quite eccentric.

I find that Call of Cthulhu materials can be a good source for 
natural animals, as well as possibilities for other creatures 
(e.g. Deep Ones can be used as generic "fish men").  The 
Dreamlands setting is especially appropriate for a fantasy 
setting (Gugs can be trolls or ogres of some sort, etc.).

There are a few beasties spec-ed out in MagicWorld, nothing 
that's not recapitulated in some fashion in the RQ3 creatures 
book though, IIRC.

I've been planning to convert some of my personal favorites from 
D&D to BRP mechanics for a while, but haven't had the time (or 
gumption) lately to work on it:

Umber Hulk
Beholder
Mind Flayer
Lammasu
Shedu
Coatl


Has anyone else worked on these or others?

Stephen Posey
slposey at concentric.net