[Rq-rules] Runequestpt

[Tom Zunder (Home)]

On 28 Feb 2006 at 9:15, Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote:

> Good manners cost nothing, other than goodwill...
He sort of got a tiger by the tail and let go, goodwill will 
have been lost. Politeness would have gained him credit.

> Can I just say, given how snippy Matt Sprange got when various people
> (including myself) queried why early iterations were changing things from
> RQII/III (for no good reason, as far as we could see), that I find this
> _deeply_ ironic?
I have it. Let's say Ken did a good job, it's a slightly 
different version of RQ2/3 with Steve's new and interesting 
RuneMagic rules. It's good since RQ is good, it has little 
that is radically different, even the new Strike Ranks and 
Combat Actions are ok, although much more like D&D. 
You can use the stat blocks with any BRP with minimal 
roleplayers sense. The opening text about the radical 
overhaul and modernisation is a bit of a laugh tho', but 
then again for a d20 player this is still a leap forward.

> Indeed, but with myself at least Mongoose have (yet again...) blotted their
> copybook. If it's "number compatible" with RQII/III I'll still be
> interested in particular sourcebooks, and as ever what will actual count is
> the actual product on the FLGS shelf.
They have. The game is fine. I recommend we all give it a 
fair crack and if it's okay then we evangelise it, it'll get new 
blood into BRP. You can always then run variant games if 
you want the old spells back or the SR like they used to 
be. A published supported game beats a dead one 
everytime for new players.

Tom