Dare I ask?

[Kyle Aaron]

What are the differences between MRQ and the new BRP?

Aside from the obvious ones, like MRQ has no "starship pilot" skill.

I ask because I'd like to start a BRP dage ages fantasy campaign next week, and I have the MRQ SRD pdf from here today, but it'll be some months before the new BRP makes it Down Under.

[Lord Twig]

Some other obvious ones:

MRQ uses Hit locations only, no general HPs. BRP uses general HPs and Hit locations are optional.

MRQ uses assigned experience checks. In BRP if you successfully use a skill (in a stress situation) you get a check.

MRQ combat rules are broken without house rules to fix. BRP doesn't need fixing.

Much more...

[Trifletraxor]

Quality. A huge difference in quality. (At least so I hope)

Use Advanced RuneQuest to start with, and then convert to the new BRP rules when you get them. The switch should be easy.

SGL.

[Trifletraxor]

BRP vs. MRQ & the OGL

SGL.

[TrippyHippy]

The MRQ deluxe combat rules aren't broken, although they do make use of reference tables still, which some may feel is an unneccessary complication for what is just a contested roll between attacker and defender.

The BRP combat rules are simpler to use though, generally.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by TrippyHippy

The MRQ deluxe combat rules aren't broken, although they do make use of reference tables still, which some may feel is an unneccessary complication for what is just a contested roll between attacker and defender.

The BRP combat rules are simpler to use though, generally.

Don't the Deluxe rules still have the problem of weapon APs not being used.?


Another big difference between BRP and MRQ-

In BRP you can learn how to play the game by reading the examples. With MRQ the last thing you want to do is read the examples, as they contradict the rules.

[TrippyHippy]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Don't the Deluxe rules still have the problem of weapon APs not being used.?


Another big difference between BRP and MRQ-

In BRP you can learn how to play the game by reading the examples. With MRQ the last thing you want to do is read the examples, as they contradict the rules.

No. Weapon APs are used in parrying to reduce damage.

The combat examples are better in the Deluxe edition too - although I always find those things boring to read.

The basic problem with the combat system, when it was first written, was that the attacker had to roll once to hit, and then roll again in a contested roll against a defender, if they declared that they wanted to dodge or parry the blow as a reaction. Noteably, the free PDF on this site still states this as the case in the Close Combat Attacks summary (which is a pity).

The Deluxe rules eliminate the extra roll, by including everything into a single contested roll between attacker and defender. This contest is referred to either the Dodge table or the Parry table, and the results are read accordingly (including outcomes like fumbles, giving ground, weapon APs soaking damage, being overextended, etc). To make a Parry or Dodge, a defender must use up a Reaction slot (they have an equal number of Reactions to their standard number of Actions in a round). If they have no Reaction slots left or available, then the tables are still referred to, but it is assumed that the Defender automatically fails his roll.

Like I say, it's a functioning system in Deluxe edition, but it's use of tables, and other complications make it a less intuitive, less simple system than that used in BRP (which, critically, removes the need to reference any table for the outcome). The MRQ system does however give the feel of having more tactical options in combat.

The technique of basing Combat upon contested rolls is not new, but it was much more intuitively realised in the Pendragon game - which makes use of no tables whatsoever, as well as ditching the need for a seperate initiative roll. Both combatants simply makes a contested roll on a D20, trying to roll higher than thier opponent, but less than their skill score. Whoever wins, applies the damage, while the loser has to soak it up. This makes combats much faster, and more dangerous.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by TrippyHippy

No. Weapon APs are used in parrying to reduce damage.

Not really. Since combat is now treated as an opposed content, if the defender wins then the attack'er success is downgraded to a failure, and thus does no damage. So parry APs only come if to play when the both roll a critical.

Originally Posted by TrippyHippy

The basic problem with the combat system, when it was first written, was that the attacker had to roll once to hit, and then roll again in a contested roll against a defender, if they declared that they wanted to dodge or parry the blow as a reaction. Noteably, the free PDF on this site still states this as the case in the Close Combat Attacks summary (which is a pity).

Nope. You made the most common mistake when learning how to play MRQ. You read the rulebook. According to Matt Sprrange and the folks at Mongoose, combat was always a single die roll for the attacker and the chart is a misprint. Believe me, people went over that for months on the MRQ site.

Basically, if you didn't happen to go to the Mongoose website and download the players update, you weren't playing the game right.



BTW, all this confusion is another difference. The rules in BRP have been a lot easier to follow.

[TrippyHippy]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Not really. Since combat is now treated as an opposed content, if the defender wins then the attack'er success is downgraded to a failure, and thus does no damage. So parry APs only come if to play when the both roll a critical.

No. The new parry table in the Deluxe edition (p54) shows:

- If both the defender and attacker succeed in their rolls, then the damage is reduced by the AP of the weapon.
- If the parry rolls a critical then the damage is reduced by twice the AP.
- If the attack rolls a critical, then the maximum damage is inflicted.
- If they both roll a critical, then maximum damage is applied and twice the AP is reduced.

The opposed contest rule, generally, is clarified in conjunction with this application in combat, on p22 also. The Deluxe book is open in front of me as I type this, and I've played in several sessions with that book, those rules, and my gaming group. That is what is stated, clearly, in the text of the rules, and with the examples given.

Nope. You made the most common mistake when learning how to play MRQ. You read the rulebook. According to Matt Sprrange and the folks at Mongoose, combat was always a single die roll for the attacker and the chart is a misprint. Believe me, people went over that for months on the MRQ site.

With respect, you appear to making a more critical error by not reading the book. Regardless of what may have been argued about on the net, the rules I have explained, in both the new and old books, are precisely correct. The rules in the old book don't work very well, but they do work, functionally, in the Deluxe edition. My preference, however, is for a slightly simpler system still, which is what BRP provides me with.

BTW, all this confusion is another difference. The rules in BRP have been a lot easier to follow.

I agree that the changes in the rules have caused difficulties in interpretation. We can see this in the free PDF rules on this site, which appear to actually conflate the old rules with the revised ones. My advice, honestly, is to enjoy all the MRQ setting supplements (which are still 99% compatible with BRP), use the MRQ rules as optional rules for certain things (like Hit Locations, character generation, or alternative magic systems), but use BRP for the core rules in most games.

[Atgxtg]

Trippy,

According to the player's update, page 4 it states:

The attack and defence rolls are then made
simultaneously by the combatants and the results
compared according to the opposed test mechanics: as
usual a Critical Success always beats a normal success,
but if the success levels are equal, the higher Success roll
wins and the lower roll is demoted by one level. I.e. if
both combatants roll a normal success, then the higher
roll remains a success, but the lower roll is downgraded
to a failure, or if both roll a critical success the lower
roll is downgraded to a normal success. This may seem
unfair when both combatants have succeeded, but it is a logical outcome. In such situations the winning opponent
has exhibited either greater luck or greater competence,
and turned the situation to his advantage.


So a success vs. a success is treated as a success vs. a failure on the table.


While I can't speak for the actual Deluxe book. The same thing is is SRD under Close Combat, Step 3-Opposed Test.


That is what people have been talking about since the latest update came out.

And no the rules have not been correctly explained in the books. That has been the case since someone pointed out the examples of play and the combat matrix to the author a year ago, and he was the one who said the book was wrong.