[Runequest] RQ6

David Cake dave at difference.com.au
Tue Dec 4 17:16:38 EST 2012


It is a really nice set of rules. 
I think the basic combat rules make for much more interesting play, especially of combat, than RQ2 or RQ3 did . For 'modern' tastes (especially players used to D&D 3.5 etc), RQ3 is a game that relies a bit too much on random chance and not enough on tactical choice, IMO, and had a real problem with higher powered play where clashes between 'titans' that should be exciting could often end up quite long and tedious. 
The magic rules in RQ6 are solid and interesting. 
I find RQ3 Sorcery basically a dreadfully designed system in a number of ways, and am unlikely to ever play with those rules again, at least without enough house rules to basically rewrite the system significantly. And RQ3 shamanism is seriously underdeveloped - playing  a shaman in RQ3 was moderately fun, but mostly because all the divine magic available from Spirit cults. 
RQ6, on the other hand, has well developed, interesting, balanced sorcery and shamanism, as well as a solid and interesting divine magic system. 
And there are a lot of other nice touches in RQ6 - a good skills system, Passions, etc. 

I also think that, while it has a few oddities, on the whole it is a much better balanced system than the prior Mongoose rules. Plus a whole extra magic system (Mysticism, which while it has its problems (mostly with game balance), looks like a great distinct addition). 

So all in all, I like RQ6 a lot, and think it should be a very solid set of rules. Well worth getting. 

A big caveat - if  you are wanting to run a Gloranthan game, you are probably better off using the Legends rules (that are essentially the renamed Mongoose RuneQuest 2 rules), as at least they are compatible with the large amount of (very cheap! $1 each!) Gloranthan second age material originally published by Mongoose, now sold by Design Mechanism.  I think RQ6 WILL be a great system for playing in Glorantha, perhaps the best RQ ever, but right now it is a long way from it (and my impression is that this may take until 2014 as (somewhat bafflingly to me) The Design Mechanism originally did not put Gloranthan rules as a high priority. 
(that said, I'm not taking my own advice here - I am running RQ6 for my Gloranthan game and kludging things together as we go, but it definitely is not working as well as I had hoped). 


That all said, if you like a more traditional RQ3 style of game, the Basic Roleplaying rules are quite similar to RQ3 but have a lot of extra interesting stuff. Worth a look. Sorcery still needs fixing, though!

Cheers

David

On 04/12/2012, at 6:51 AM, Styopa wrote:

> So...Runequest 6?
> Opinions?
> I haven't got it yet (expect it for Xmas) but so far what I've seen is quite positive.
> 
> Here's my motivation - I've loved RQ3 for a long time.  Possibly some of the best times of my life have been late evenings DM'ing RQ with my sons and their friends.  
> 
> Yet now post high school they're moving on, and both they (at their various colleges) and their friends (at their new lives) are wanting to spread RQ to benighted gaming groups whose breadth of experience has been D&D 4.0, or (at best) Pathfinder D&D.
> 
> The problem is that my RQ3 isn't just 3.1 or 3.2, it's really more like "RQ3-point-Mine".  I have so many house rules and kludges that have become standardized in my game that I'm more and more convinced that it's simply not exportable, and particularly not for younger gamers without an experienced hand's studied 'casualness' to published rules.  (I started gaming clearly in another era...)
> 
> So what I'm thinking is that their lives (and their evangelism of the Joy of Simulationist gaming) would be much easier if we made a wholesale switch to a more 'current' version - something that other players could conceivably buy, something they can get today, something whose support materials are available to everyone and not with the bulk of the rules buried in my laptop or stacks of legal pads.
> 
> I skipped over RQ4 & RQ5 (MRQs), I had no need of a new system plus some of the considered reviews left me feeling underwhelmed at the re-writes.
> 
> So now I'm looking at RQ6.  From the limited bit I've seen/heard, I LIKE some of the choices from the cover art homage to RQ2, to the addition of alternate magic systems to better address what ended up kludgy in RQ3.
> 
> I desperately hope that we can - with a minimum of pain - update to something more currently/commercially available.  It seems like RQ6 has perhaps taken RQ3 and truly updated it with some gaming systems/concepts from the last decade or two that have really solved some issues.
> 
> I need a new system.  Is RQ6 going to serve?
> _______________________________________________
> Runequest mailing list
> Runequest at rpgreview.net
> http://rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net




More information about the Runequest mailing list