[Runequest] Pete's RQ updates & D&D conversion notes

Alban de ROSTOLAN aluban at yahoo.fr
Tue Nov 5 22:37:06 EST 2013

Hello all,

If I wanted to run a "Glorantha d20" game, I think I'd reduce the number of base classes to 5:

-Expert (from Unearthed Arcana)
-Apprentice Sorcerer
-Apprentice Shaman

Then, I would treat Shaman, Sorcerers, Priests and Runelords as Prestige classes.

Le Lundi 4 novembre 2013 22h41, Peter Maranci <pmaranci at gmail.com> a écrit :
My conversion notes are much less ambitious; I'm just trying to help D&D gamemasters make use of the RQ/BRP/D100-related material on my site. I don't think that Feats come into that, thank goodness! They're so cludgy.
On Nov 4, 2013 3:44 PM, "Styopa" <styopa1 at gmail.com> wrote:

For those not sure what he's talking about, the D&D3.0 SRD is here (http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html) and the feats list is here (http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd/srdfeats.rtf). 
>Honestly, I'd say feats are either VERY simple to convert, rationalizing them to % from d20 as an innate character natural benefit (Alertness feat normally gives +2 on listen/spot checks; in RQ I'd say it's 'Keen Senses' +10% to the same; Brew Potion feat just gives the RQ character some basic skill at Knowledge (Alchemy)), systemically impossible (Heavy Armor feat, for example, exists in D&D *solely* to prevent mages from wearing armor - clearly, that's not what RQ's about...), or silly (Empower, Maximize Damage, etc.).
>There are some boundary-cases like Cleave; one could argue it's a 'special mighty blow' technique I guess - that I frankly find silly to my simulationist ethos, and would just disregard to the great wails and gnashing of player-teeth.
>I can't say that I've migrated all that many characters from D&D to RQ - this has only ever really been a thought-exercise.  By the time they're leveled-up enough to make the transfer challenging, they're so intrinsically wedded into the D&D level-based system that transfer to RQ is practically crippling.
>OTOH, I *do* cheerfully use D&D modules in my game, as my players enjoy classic dungeon crawls.  I contextualize to RQ setting thematically, of course, and then technically (in treasure, for example, gp = silver pennies, potions are largely left unchanged, other magic items are converted to MP crystals or comparable items (a +1 sword becomes +1 damage, +5% to hit/parry, etc)) and winging it madly as far as encounters, either scaling them approximately to RQ (ie a room of 16 orcs might end up being a half-dozen broo as numbers are SO much more weighty in RQ) or just leaving them as-is (a tomb with 10 skeleton guards in RQ is scary, compared to a D&D walk-in-the-park challenge).
>Shrine of Tamoachan, Rahasia, Tomb of Horrors, yes, even the Barrier Peaks were great fun.
>Ravenloft - as an RQ adventure - will be amazing when they stumble onto it.
>On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Leon Kirshtein <leonbk at yahoo.com> wrote:
>With D&D3.0 and Pathfinder rules, conversion to RQ is both easier and harder. Easier in terms that the systems are a lot more skill oriented, and thus easier to convert, but at the same time Feats and certain class features may prove to be a lot harder to handle.
>>Has anyone looked into that?
>>On Thu, 10/31/13, Peter Maranci <pmaranci at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Subject: [Runequest] Pete's RQ updates & D&D conversion notes
>> To: "RuneQuest Rules" <runequest at rpgreview.net>
>> Date: Thursday, October 31, 2013, 1:33 PM
>> I've posted a lot of
>> updates to the site over the past few months, including new
>> up-to-date HTML versions of the Found Items, Magic Items,
>> and Chaotic Features sections - 1,469 entries in all.
>> http://runequest.org/chaosproj.htm
>> I'm considering posting epub versions as
>> well, for mobile devices and offline use.
>> Although most of the entries are pretty
>> generic, I wrote up a quick RQ to D&D guide - not to
>> convert campaigns, just to help D&D GMs make easier use
>> of the more RuneQuest-specific items. I haven't played
>> D&D in a very long time, though, so if anyone happens to
>> notice anything that's wrong or could use clarification,
>> please let me know.
>> http://runequest.org/rqtodd.htm
>> ->Peter
>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>> _______________________________________________
>> Runequest mailing list
>> Runequest at rpgreview.net
>> http://mail.rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net
>>Runequest mailing list
>>Runequest at rpgreview.net
>Runequest mailing list
>Runequest at rpgreview.net

Runequest mailing list
Runequest at rpgreview.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20131105/81a30dfb/attachment.html>

More information about the Runequest mailing list