Dare I ask?

[Kyle Aaron]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

The important point here isn't the dissension between author and company but between version of the game.

Books don't have dissension, people do.

For instance the encumbrance rules were so bad that a knight in mail couldn't hit anything. I know, I tried.

My game is set in a sort of Dark Ages, equivalent to England about 600. So plate won't exist. Nor will knights, only thanes - though they're pretty much the same thing. Thanes in mail will exist, but my reading of the rules and a few back-of-the-envelope calculations show that a thane in mail will have around a -20 malus to his physical and combat skills. Given that characters can start with up to 70 in a combat skill, that leaves 50 for them, so I think they'll still smash each-other up a lot.

Well, in that case you are being very unfair to BRP. It's hard for us to play the game when it hasn't been released yet.

Yet amazingly, it's not hard for you all to criticise or praise versions you've not played. You're arguing that A is better than B when you've played at most one of them.

That's what I was disappointed in - the Edition Wars.

Then why did you start it? Go to the Harn threads and ask what is better HM3 or HM Gold and see if you don't get a similar effect.

I asked,

What are the differences between MRQ and the new BRP?

I didn't ask whether MRQ was better or worse than BRP, I asked what the differences were. The answers were largely, "Mongoose suxxorz."

Naturally if I asked the Harn guys which edition was best I'd get Edition Wars. But if I ask them what the differences are, they tell me. You guys largely avoided that question, because you wanted to have an Edition War.

[Triff]

Originally Posted by Kyle Aaron

Books don't have dissension, people do.

Gun fanatics logic, wihtout doubt the best kind of logic!

Yet amazingly, it's not hard for you all to criticise or praise versions you've not played. You're arguing that A is better than B when you've played at most one of them.

Actully, most of us have played more than one version. And it's not really the various BRP incarnations that are discussed here, it's specific BRP game mechanics.

But if I ask them what the differences are, they tell me. You guys largely avoided that question, because you wanted to have an Edition War.

The differences have been very plainly stated for you to read. After that, the thread derailed to the point. You did however get your answer, so you don't really have any good reason to complain.

SGL.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by Kyle Aaron

It seems that BRP is not as simple as it first appears...
I asked about BRP, and got this thread.... Thanks for helping me decide, guys!

Don't worry, gentlemen. Everyone in this thread conducted themselves honourably (perhaps with the exception of the Sorceror v Shaman flaming, but even that came to an end reasonably, and not too acrimoniously). This guy knew his question was provocative (see the thread title for proof) and then has the gall to tell people off for being provoked! His question was answered admirably within 3 posts, before the laudable sport of Mongoose-bashing began in earnest - if he can't be bothered to follow a link, what can you do?

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

I stand quite corrected. I don't recall ever noticing that paragraph before (though I will note against a standard opponent, its still not clear to me, barring use of one of the magical Sights that there's any way to identify the spirit involved). That said, definitely one for your argument.

This is why the shaman has a huge advantage here, with his permanent 2nd sight.

And now, for something completely different (thanks to Triff), the horse being dead and resurected () :, .



Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by RMS

Since the discussion continued in a serious manner, a joke seemed out of place, but I can't think of where else I'd share it.



You know goalpost moving is only a foul if done intentionally, and even then it's only a 2 minute minor.

Of course, if everyone else bothering to read this now is from Europe, I'll have to explain the joke to them and it'll get lost in translation.

Please do (Sorry, but I'm from said Europe, and English is not my mother tongue).

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Kyle Aaron

Books don't have dissension, people do.

Books don't have ideas, either. Or write RPGs, or play them.

[quote=Kloster;6687]


[quote=Kyle Aaron;6677]
game is set in a sort of Dark Ages, equivalent to England about 600. So plate won't exist. Nor will knights, only thanes - though they're pretty much the same thing. Thanes in mail will exist, but my reading of the rules and a few back-of-the-envelope calculations show that a thane in mail will have around a -20 malus to his physical and combat skills. Given that characters can start with up to 70 in a combat skill, that leaves 50 for them, so I think they'll still smash each-other up a lot.
[/QUOTE=Kyle Aaron;6677]


I din't say plate, I said mail. Take another look at the mail, plus padding, plus weapons and the final penalty. You'll miss a lot, especially since skills acap out at around 110%.

The aurthor's intention, assuming that you would like to know about the dffierences between HArn 2/3 and Har Gold, is that more weight tires you out faster, but doesn't reduce your combat effectiveness.

Originally Posted by Kyle Aaron

Yet amazingly, it's not hard for you all to criticise or praise versions you've not played. You're arguing that A is better than B when you've played at most one of them.

As Triff, has pointed out we have played more than one edtion. In fact, most of the old times here have played most of them. I personally have played or run RQ, RQ3, Strombringer, Ring World, Call of Cthulhu, Elric, ElfQuest, Superworld, Magic World, and Hawkmoon.

So I have played those games. I have alread had Nephlim, Futrue World and MRQ. Never got the change to play Future World, and didn't care for the other two. I fell pefectly capable of discussion posting of rules about them, though, as I have read them, can work out what roll under X means, and have kept up witjh the numerous changes of how MRQ plays.

But don't assume that we haven't played these games. That we have explains why some of he debates got the way the did. Most of the old foggies here have been playing a variation of RQ for decades. In fact, you would need to have familarity with the systems just to be able to follow some of the debates.

Originally Posted by Kyle Aaron

That's what I was disappointed in - the Edition Wars.


I asked,

What are the differences between MRQ and the new BRP?

I didn't ask whether MRQ was better or worse than BRP, I asked what the differences were. The answers were largely, "Mongoose suxxorz."

Naturally if I asked the Harn guys which edition was best I'd get Edition Wars. But if I ask them what the differences are, they tell me. You guys largely avoided that question, because you wanted to have an Edition War.

As Triff has pointed out you did get your answer. Then there was some debate over how the MRQ rules actually handle combat. Then it degenerated into a war of magic systems.

You did step into a sore spot with many of the BRP community. Promises were made about MRQ that were not lived up to, and there is a strong rift between some RQ fans and MRQ fans.

When you ask about differeces, you will get what they are, and you will also get the biases of the person who types the response. THat is true with any sort of opinion or reporting. You can go right down the line and get a good idea of where most of the membership of this foum stand in terms on MRQ and BRP.

Heck, the Administator hold the record for being banned from the Mongoose website.

[Rurik]

Almost all of the arguing going on here though has had little or nothing to do with MRQ for the last umpteen pages - it has been over RQ3 Magic systems and which is the most powerful or broken or not broken.

[frogspawner]

Exactly. The initial question was answered very quickly, and the debate moved on...

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by soltakss

Gods of Glorantha had precious little sorcery in it. The Mostali had sorcery and a few examples of spells and the Malkioni had a few examples of spells. But nothing compared with the numbers of Divine Spells and Spirit Magic spells available.

However it had a lot of rules that affected divine potency, and thus the relative balance between the systems, and a few that effected shamanism to a limited degree (mostly in terms of some of the shaman/divine hybrids). So you can't disconnect it from a discussion of balance between the systems.

So, to look at the bigger picture you have to look at all the rules for the system, regardless of setting (except where rules are specifically for one setting and no other).

And when those rules aren't in a setting book, I do.

As far as I know, Allied Spirits and Rune Lords are not just for Glorantha - I use them in Alternate Earth setting without a problem. Similarly, I use a lot of the spells in other supplements in Alternate Earth.

You can use all kinds of things for settings other than what's intended, but when it requires a book that isn't in the core rules, you simply can't assume they're in use for general discussion. That's been my point; there are all kinds of people who played RQ3 who never looked anything from Gods of Glorantha because it was for a setting they weren't running, and for those, any impact its extra divine functions added was essentially irrelevant. As such, when talking about RQ3 per se, I don't consider it any more (or less) meaningful than bringing in someone's house rules. It simply can't be the baseline of discussion. That doesn't mean its not relevant when talking about fixing the imbalances, but it says nothing about it being there because rune lords, allied spirits and those various divine spells simply aren't in the core book and aren't even in a generic add-on. Its parallel to talking about D&D3 and bringing in material that only appeared in the Forgotten Realms book; it can change the issue considerably, isn't available to all users, and essentially makes it a different discussion.

It's like talking about Star Trek and only discussing the Pilot episode. Or perhaps talking about the original series and none of the later ones, that's a better analogy.

Actually, I find it closer to the above comparison I made; it assumes additional material outside the basic book, and once you start doing that, where is it legitimate to stop? Should I bring in ki powers from Land of the Ninja if it happened to support my side of the argument too?

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

Exactly. The initial question was answered very quickly, and the debate moved on...

Though I'll note there's been plenty of acrimony about specific issues in the new BRP elsewhere, but that, as noted, is about rules, not the system per se, and given that the new BRP is a combination of several past versions, some with fairly distinct traits, is only to be expected.