PDA

View Full Version : Because there isn't enough RuneQuest here.



Darklord Xavez
2010-06-28, 12:17 PM
How many other people here have seriously played (not just tried once) or are currently playing RuneQuest? All I see in the Roleplaying Games subforum is this:
D&D3.5D&D4eD&D3.xExaltedD&D3.5D&D3.5D&D4eD&DD&DD&D!
Why not RuneQuest?
-Xavez

Yuki Akuma
2010-06-28, 12:23 PM
You see a lot of D&D here because...

Well...

See that comic over to the left?

And we don't get nearly that many 4e threads.

Another_Poet
2010-06-28, 12:23 PM
I play in an ongoing RuneQuest game using a homebrew Asian-influenced world. It is awesome.

Things I love about the system: the mechanic for potentially leveling up a skill any time you roll it. It makes every roll exciting and fun.

Things I hate about the system: nothing. Although my DM handheld me through the char gen process; I can imagine it would be a bit complicated to learn just by reading the book and grabbing some dice.

ap

Tinydwarfman
2010-06-28, 12:24 PM
I dunno, do you think it might reflect the general popularity of those games? Also, this is a forum for a D&D webcomic. What do you think is going to be the most prominent game? :smalltongue:

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-28, 12:27 PM
Yep. I like the skill system because you aren't limited like D&D. In D&D, fighters can only fight, wizards can only cast spells, clerics can only do healing and deal with demons and such, rogues can only be sneaky, and monks can only fight (and be sneaky at the same time). In runequest, you can have the sneaky, combat-effective guy with a bit of magic (think the Grey Mouser), or you can have the huge, hulking barbarian who can sing (think Fafhrd).
-Xavez
P.S.
I dunno, do you think it might reflect the general popularity of those games? Also, this is a forum for a D&D webcomic. What do you think is going to be the most prominent game? :smalltongue:

It might. Not a definite. Maybe RuneQuest people hang out elsewhere.

Knaight
2010-06-28, 12:34 PM
Well, Clerics and Wizards can do just about everything, but the point stands. As for Rune Quest, its interesting, but I already have the potential roll boosting in my heavily home brewed system of choice, and everything else it boasts seems like the typical classless system.

And it probably reflects the popularity of the games well enough. D&D takes a pretty absurdly high amount of the market share, Rune Quest is minor.

rat-morningstar
2010-06-28, 12:39 PM
i'm sorry, RuneWhat?


basically, everyone knows D&D
either as a game, or as a game made by satan to influence the young and vulnerable minds of children

Comet
2010-06-28, 12:43 PM
D&D is more popular.

RuneQuest is better, though, I'd say. I very much prefer skill-based systems to class-based ones. And RuneQuest does a better job of emulating that sense of classic fantasy adventure, while D&D has practically been its own genre since 3rd edition or so.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-28, 12:44 PM
i'm sorry, RuneWhat?


basically, everyone knows D&D
either as a game, or as a game made by satan to influence the young and vulnerable minds of children

RuneQuest is a system based entirely on skills. There are no classes or levels; instead, players improve by increasing individual skills. It is much less combat-oriented and hit points and damage are figured much more realisitcly; as such, nobody can have 257 hit points.
-Xavez

lesser_minion
2010-06-28, 12:47 PM
The latest version of Runequest is OGL, so you should be able to find most of the rules online.

Alternatively, a very similar ruleset was used in Call of Cthulhu. There's a clone called GORE out there as well.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-28, 12:50 PM
The latest version of Runequest is OGL, so you should be able to find most of the rules online.

Alternatively, a very similar ruleset was used in Call of Cthulhu. There's a clone called GORE out there as well.

CoC is by Chaosium, and so is RuneQuest, hence the similarity.
-Xavez

Comet
2010-06-28, 12:55 PM
By the way, since we're talking about RuneQuest here, anybody else enjoy playing in the world of Glorantha?
It's one of my favourite fantasy settings, with loads of awesome cultures, interesting history/mythology and magic that actually feels magical.

It also spawned one of my favourite computer games, King of Dragon Pass, where you play a tribe of Orlanthians as they set out to inhabit the titular region. Very immersive and an excellent way to learn about the world and really get a feel for the Orlanthian culture.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-28, 01:06 PM
By the way, since we're talking about RuneQuest here, anybody else enjoy playing in the world of Glorantha?
It's one of my favourite fantasy settings, with loads of awesome cultures, interesting history/mythology and magic that actually feels magical.

It also spawned one of my favourite computer games, King of Dragon Pass, where you play a tribe of Orlanthians as they set out to inhabit the titular region. Very immersive and an excellent way to learn about the world and really get a feel for the Orlanthian culture.

I have nothing on people who like it, but I don't like Glorantha AT ALL. It's both too complicated and a bit too silly. I mean, a Dragonewt rune (not to mention the dragonewts themselves)? Just stick with the Dragon rune and be done with it. HeroQuesting is cool though.
-Xavez

Tinydwarfman
2010-06-28, 01:33 PM
Meh, RuneQuest is fine, but I like GURPS more for fulfilling the skill-based game in my collection. Mostly because of it's ridiculous openness. RuneQuest is too limited for me. D&D at least has multi-classing, and a huge amount of material, along with a broad definition of "Medieval Fantasy" :smallbiggrin:

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-28, 01:36 PM
Meh, RuneQuest is fine, but I like GURPS more for fulfilling the skill-based game in my collection. Mostly because of it's ridiculous openness. RuneQuest is too limited for me. D&D at least has multi-classing, and a huge amount of material, along with a broad definition of "Medieval Fantasy" :smallbiggrin:

RuneQuest fits any setting if you buy the correct books, like RuneQuest: Pirates.
-Xavez

Tinydwarfman
2010-06-28, 01:40 PM
RuneQuest fits any setting if you buy the correct books, like RuneQuest: Pirates.
-Xavez

Yeah, but it's all within a certain genre niche though, you know? GURPS goes everywhere and does everything.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-28, 01:43 PM
Yeah, but it's all within a certain genre niche though, you know? GURPS goes everywhere and does everything.

I guess, but let's stay on track. Back to RuneQuest: I looked at the new rules for the combat skills, and I love them. How about you guys?
-Xavez

Akal Saris
2010-06-28, 02:27 PM
I'm a little confused - isn't RuneQuest that board game that was sort of like D&D 1E Lite, where you move along the board and monsters jump you?

I wanted to play it on Saturday when we realized that nobody had broguht Dominion over, but somebody had taken all the minis for his D&D collection :smallfrown:

Satyr
2010-06-28, 02:30 PM
Runequest is a nice system. A bit bland for my taste (that's probably the d%) but otherwise it is a solid and traditional system with little problems (when a system hasn't changed much in what? 25 years? this indicates a solid a reliable core of the rules).
What's awesome is the differentiation between species and culture and profession for the character creation without some antiquated nonsense like classes and levels, or the utterly idiotic idea of a passive defense. And since avoiding obviously retarded ideas is not that common as the term "common sense" should indicate, these qualities should be emphasized even when they should be a matter t course by now.
The only problem I had with the system is that starting characters have too low probabilities at succeeding at standard tasks, so if I would play the game again, I would grant everybody a random 2d20/2 extra skill points per skill.

And D&D overshadows dozens of better but lesser known systems, not despite but because of its mediocrity, but that's nothing new.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 09:41 AM
Runequest is a nice system. A bit bland for my taste (that's probably the d%) but otherwise it is a solid and traditional system with little problems (when a system hasn't changed much in what? 25 years? this indicates a solid a reliable core of the rules).
What's awesome is the differentiation between species and culture and profession for the character creation without some antiquated nonsense like classes and levels, or the utterly idiotic idea of a passive defense. And since avoiding obviously retarded ideas is not that common as the term "common sense" should indicate, these qualities should be emphasized even when they should be a matter t course by now.
The only problem I had with the system is that starting characters have too low probabilities at succeeding at standard tasks, so if I would play the game again, I would grant everybody a random 2d20/2 extra skill points per skill.

And D&D overshadows dozens of better but lesser known systems, not despite but because of its mediocrity, but that's nothing new.

I like your 2d20/2 idea. Another (somewhat more realistic if you ask me) idea would be to give 200 extra skill points at the start (instead of 100) and make the max you can put in a skill 40. Then they can have a bunch of useful abilities.
-Xavez

taltamir
2010-06-29, 09:46 AM
RuneQuest is a system based entirely on skills. There are no classes or levels; instead, players improve by increasing individual skills. It is much less combat-oriented and hit points and damage are figured much more realisitcly; as such, nobody can have 257 hit points.
-Xavez

sounds a lot like gurps to me...

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 09:53 AM
sounds a lot like gurps to me...

The main difference between RuneQuest and GURPS is that runequest uses the d% and the d3 most of the time (d3 is the damage for longswords/other one-handed weapons).
-Xavez

Greenish
2010-06-29, 10:01 AM
It is much less combat-oriented and hit points and damage are figured much more realisitcly; as such, nobody can have 257 hit points.So that the trollkin with a sharp stick can kill you with a lucky roll. (Oh look, it hits head. Ah, critical.) Then, if memory serves, it had fumbles. Gods I hate fumbles.

And then you had different skills for hitting things with your left foot, right foot, left fist, right fist, for each and every separate weapon wielded in right or left hand. And a separate skill for doing better damage with unarmed attacks. Being good at magic made you worse at sneaking. Spells had a failure chance even without armour (but armour made it worse). Buying Rune spells reduced your change to actually cast them (or any other spells).

You'd hunt squirrels with the equivalent of Inflict Minor Wounds for the miniscule change in increasing your Might which you needed for mana and to sacrifice for Rune spells and to increase your change to actually cast a spell.

It was possible, nay, likely that you'd never ever become better at anything you were halfaway competent.

Runequest was my first system, so the general noobishness from both me and my group just might have coloured my perception, though, and I enjoyed the different takes on "standard fantasy races" in Glorantha (even though the GM, under the influence of Drizzt, house-ruled dark elves into D&D Drow because "mushrooms are lame").

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 10:13 AM
Okay, Greenish, let's respond to that a bit at a time:


So that the trollkin with a sharp stick can kill you with a lucky roll. (Oh look, it hits head. Ah, critical.) Then, if memory serves, it had fumbles. Gods I hate fumbles.

The good thing about RuneQuest is you can change one part of the system without destroying the game's balance. Fumbles can easily be changed. Also, Trollkin are worse than KOBOLDS.


And then you had different skills for hitting things with your left foot, right foot, left fist, right fist, for each and every separate weapon wielded in right or left hand. And a separate skill for doing better damage with unarmed attacks.

I think that you are talking about a. the penalty for using an off hand (but maybe about hit locations) and b. Damage Modifier, which is not a skill. But I'm not really sure.


Being good at magic made you worse at sneaking. Spells had a failure chance even without armour (but armour made it worse). Buying Rune spells reduced your change to actually cast them (or any other spells).

I think you're right on this one. Rune magic SUCKS. And sorcerers, with all those different skills they have to improve, can't really focus on anything else if they want to be a really good spellcaster.


You'd hunt squirrels with the equivalent of Inflict Minor Wounds for the miniscule change in increasing your Might which you needed for mana and to sacrifice for Rune spells and to increase your change to actually cast a spell.

I don't see Mana or Might anywhere. I have no clue what you're talking about here.


It was possible, nay, likely that you'd never ever become better at anything you were halfaway competent.

You're half right. If you have, say, 40% in a skill you want to improve, you have a 60% chance of adding 1d4+1 to that skill; otherwise, you would add only 1.


Runequest was my first system, so the general noobishness from both me and my group just might have coloured my perception, though, and I enjoyed the different takes on "standard fantasy races" in Glorantha (even though the GM, under the influence of Drizzt, house-ruled dark elves into D&D Drow because "mushrooms are lame").

RuneQuest is a pretty hard system to learn. Your GM made a mistake by making dark elves into drow, though. NEVER try to put D&D stuff into RuneQuest without considering what it would do to the game.
Just a couple of my opinions,
Darklord Xavez

Oslecamo
2010-06-29, 10:23 AM
I think you're right on this one. Rune magic SUCKS. And sorcerers, with all those different skills they have to improve, can't really focus on anything else if they want to be a really good spellcaster.


Ah, gotta love how initialy you leave out those little details. Yes, runequest allows you to easily splash magic in any character! But Vecna help you if you want to actualy be good at magic...:smalltongue:

I never played it but took a look at the rules. Since they're both more complex and more limited than GURPS and D&D, well, I can perfectly see why it isn't that popular. If you like limited characters that go down to a lucky enemy hit then it can be a pretty good system, but I like my powerfull and durable characters thank you very much.

Greenish
2010-06-29, 10:28 AM
The good thing about RuneQuest is you can change one part of the system without destroying the game's balance. Fumbles can easily be changed. Also, Trollkin are worse than KOBOLDS.Yeah, a kobold won't kill you with a single lucky hit regardless of how hardcore you are. A trollkin will.
I think that you are talking about a. the penalty for using an off hand (but maybe about hit locations) and b. Damage Modifier, which is not a skill. But I'm not really sure.I recall that you had separate skill for hitting with different hands (or feet). And then there was the "unarmed combat" or something like that skill that allowed you to deal more damage if you succeeded in using it (same roll as the attack you'd use it with).
I don't see Mana or Might anywhere. I have no clue what you're talking about here.The points you use to cast spells and the attribute that governs how many of them you've got (and your change in succeeding in casting a spell). I don't know the actual English terms, since we only had translated books back then, so I'm trying to back-translate them to English.

You're half right. If you have, say, 40% in a skill you want to improve, you have a 60% chance of adding 1d4+1 to that skill; otherwise, you would add only 1.And if you have 60% skill, you have 40% change of increasing it by 2-5 points. Out of 100. If you GM decreed that you had practiced it at the end of the session. I didn't remember you'd still advance if you didn't succeed, though.

Oh, and as an aside I have no idea which edition we played (assuming it has separate editions). I remember that a kukri did 1d3+4 damage though.

Tiki Snakes
2010-06-29, 10:31 AM
One of the local DM's is threatening to run a new Runequest campaign (set in the Forgotten Realms, funnily enough).

In the campaign he ran last time, a while back;
The Gnome had both his legs broken half way through and sat the rest of the in-game day (several sessions) out in the kitchen being looked after by the 8-year-old girl we had nominally rescued (called newt). He still walks with a pronounced limp.
I spent a similar amount of time a few feat away, stiff as a board because a goul got me by suprise, the party's so-called-druid nearly killed several members of the team by repeatedly trying to use archery into melee combat (despite being really, really bad at archery) and later picked up a permenant head-wound.

Oh, and we had about 1 piece of metal armour between the whole group. A chain-mail shirt, with only a small tear in the back where the orc who had been wearing it had been brutally stabbed. Good as new, really.

We generated characters mostly randomly, and were so poor that we nearly all forgot to buy any clothes at all, so the caravan we were supposed to be protecting had to provide underpants and uniforms for us all as part of our wages.

I'm looking forward to seeing how it goes this time. :smallwink:

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 10:32 AM
I never played it but took a look at the rules. Since they're both more complex and more limited than GURPS and D&D, well, I can perfectly see why it isn't that popular. If you like limited characters that go down to a lucky enemy hit then it can be a pretty good system, but I like my powerfull and durable characters thank you very much.

That's why I said that RuneQuest isn't very combat-oriented. It's very different from D&D. In Dungeons and Dragons, you know who the enemies are and are expected to fight them head-on. In RuneQuest, you have to find out who the enemies are, and then use tactics and think WAY outside the box to kill them. Like, for example, running towards a cliff while being chased by a bunch of bandits mounted on rhinoceroses and turning away at the last moment, and watch the rhinos carry their riders over the cliff. There's a lot more GM adjudication of player actions in RuneQuest, because not everything has a statistic assigned to it.
-Xavez

Greenish
2010-06-29, 10:38 AM
That's why I said that RuneQuest isn't very combat-oriented.Yes, because going to combat will make you cripple or dead. I don't recall it having much any stuff on social interaction though, even when the combat rules filled page after page after page.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 10:41 AM
Yes, because going to combat will make you cripple or dead. I don't recall it having much any stuff on social interaction though, even when the combat rules filled page after page after page.

That's so that you can play as Zorro. Combat is so extensively described because there will not be combat very often, but when there IS a combat, it will be very important (there are no random encounters) or will need special rules (see my rhino example two posts up).
-Xavez

Yora
2010-06-29, 11:01 AM
Like, for example, running towards a cliff while being chased by a bunch of bandits mounted on rhinoceroses and turning away at the last moment, and watch the rhinos carry their riders over the cliff. There's a lot more GM adjudication of player actions in RuneQuest, because not everything has a statistic assigned to it.
It's a common misconception that you don't have such situations in a game like D&D. My players come up with ideas that are not covered by the rules all the time, and I just call for an Ability check and add a circumstance modifier on the fly.
It's only a miniature tabletop game, if you want to play it that way.

Oslecamo
2010-06-29, 12:49 PM
It's a common misconception that you don't have such situations in a game like D&D. My players come up with ideas that are not covered by the rules all the time, and I just call for an Ability check and add a circumstance modifier on the fly.
It's only a miniature tabletop game, if you want to play it that way.

+1d20 to that. I've never played a D&D campaign where there's just white/black morality and you always know who the enemy is and you fight said enemy in "normal" circumstances.

Smart enemies will try to trick you, and dangerous creatures may be willing to talk if given the chance. And when you're trying to find a way to destroy the large gnoll outpost, head on charge surely isn't the best tactic. So, what's the rule to drop some barrels of oils in there and catch them on fire? Or dig underneath to topple the foundations? I've seen that and a lot more happen during my D&D gaming life.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 01:27 PM
+1d20 to that. I've never played a D&D campaign where there's just white/black morality and you always know who the enemy is and you fight said enemy in "normal" circumstances.

Smart enemies will try to trick you, and dangerous creatures may be willing to talk if given the chance. And when you're trying to find a way to destroy the large gnoll outpost, head on charge surely isn't the best tactic. So, what's the rule to drop some barrels of oils in there and catch them on fire? Or dig underneath to topple the foundations? I've seen that and a lot more happen during my D&D gaming life.

I see why you are saying this. I meant that in most combats you are expected to do a straight fight in D&D. The gnoll outpost is quite an exception to that, but most run-of-the-mill encounters in D&D are not like that. RuneQuest has fewer encounters; as such, they are usually more important. In D&D, you randomly encounter a few orc bandits and you kill them. In RuneQuest, you question the orcs and attack their camp, thus stopping the entire bandit group. Most PCs (a D&D term by the way) don't think much of random encounters (at least from my experience).
-Xavez

Oslecamo
2010-06-29, 01:35 PM
I see why you are saying this. I meant that in most combats you are expected to do a straight fight in D&D. The gnoll outpost is quite an exception to that, but most run-of-the-mill encounters in D&D are not like that. RuneQuest has fewer encounters; as such, they are usually more important. In D&D, you randomly encounter a few orc bandits and you kill them. In RuneQuest, you question the orcs and attack their camp, thus stopping the entire bandit group. Most PCs (a D&D term by the way) don't think much of random encounters (at least from my experience).
-Xavez

My D&D groups go to great lenghts to catch enemies alive to question them if they look like they can speak. And we actualy managed to "recruit" the gnolls to fight the orcs that were harassing the other border of the country after wiping out their outpost.

Like pointed out in Oots itself, random D&D ecounters are only as random as you want them to be. I've seen D&D campaigns whitout random ecounters whatsoever, and even the ones with random ecounters could produce quite interesting results if the players show interest, like the time we managed to hire some random black wyrmlings to escort us trough a particulary dangerous zone.

JonestheSpy
2010-06-29, 01:36 PM
Runequest was my favorite game for a long long time. Wasn't too crazy about the changes hen Avalon Hill bought the license, but adapted a few things. The greatest strength of the game was definitely Glorantha, the most interesting game world I've ever had the pleasure to experience. The mythology and worldbuilding and how it tied into the adventures instead of being scenic fluff was amazing. I really can't imagine playing with he same system in another world.

I just didn't do much RPing for awhile, and when I started again all my friends were playing 3rd, so that's where I ended up. Maybe I'll start tracking down the newer Glorantha stuff some time.

And another shout out for the video game King of Dragon Pass, a terrific storytellng game and one my my top five, easily.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 01:42 PM
My D&D groups go to great lenghts to catch enemies alive to question them if they look like they can speak. And we actualy managed to "recruit" the gnolls to fight the orcs that were harassing the other border of the country after wiping out their outpost.

Like pointed out in Oots itself, random D&D ecounters are only as random as you want them to be. I've seen D&D campaigns whitout random ecounters whatsoever, and even the ones with random ecounters could produce quite interesting results if the players show interest, like the time we managed to hire some random black wyrmlings to escort us trough a particulary dangerous zone.

YOU know how to play D&D. In other words, you ask before killing and have managed to shed the racist tendencies of the game (hey look! orcs! lets kill them for no reason other than the fact that they are orcs! yay!). Two thumbs up from me! (and four thumbs from my Thri-Kreen friends)
-Xavez

Kurald Galain
2010-06-29, 01:44 PM
I'm a little confused - isn't RuneQuest that board game that was sort of like D&D 1E Lite, where you move along the board and monsters jump you?

...that's probably Talisman. Although there are at least half a dozen similar games, several of which have either "rune" or "quest" in the name :smallbiggrin:

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 01:51 PM
...that's probably Talisman. Although there are at least half a dozen similar games, several of which have either "rune" or "quest" in the name :smallbiggrin:

Let's see:

RuneScape
HeroQuest (a variant of RuneQuest)
*brain block*


Can anybody think of any more?
-Xavez

Comet
2010-06-29, 01:51 PM
And another shout out for the video game King of Dragon Pass, a terrific storytellng game and one my my top five, easily.

Oh man, it's been ages since I've ran into anyone who has even heard of the game. High five!

Anyway, for those in the know, is the modern incarnation of RuneQuest much different than the old ones? The books I used when we were playing this game were published in... *checks*... 1992 or so. I'd imagine things have changed a bit since then.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-29, 01:53 PM
Oh man, it's been ages since I've ran into anyone who has even heard of the game. High five!

Anyway, for those in the know, is the modern incarnation of RuneQuest much different than the old ones? The books I used when we were playing this game were published in... *checks*... 1992 or so. I'd imagine things have changed a bit since then.

For one, they changed the name of Rune magic to Common magic. They change the name of at least one kind of magic every time they update the rules.
-Xavez

Saph
2010-06-29, 04:39 PM
...that's probably Talisman. Although there are at least half a dozen similar games, several of which have either "rune" or "quest" in the name :smallbiggrin:

Nah, I think it's Descent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent:_Journeys_in_the_Dark). It's a pretty cool game, actually. Kind of like a 4e dungeoncrawl without skill challenges and with combat being resolved about three times as fast.

I don't think it's actually set in the Runequest universe, though a lot of elements seem quite similar.

lesser_minion
2010-06-29, 04:52 PM
Let's see:

HeroQuest (a variant of RuneQuest)


No, HeroQuest was a Warhammer spin-off, bizarrely enough.

There are, as pointed out, about a quadrillion different dungeon-crawler board games out there already, and I'm pretty sure new ones are still emerging all over the place.

Tiki Snakes
2010-06-29, 09:56 PM
Actually, I'm pretty sure there's a non-warhammer related RP product of some kind that is, infact, also called HeroQuest.

Aroka
2010-06-29, 10:54 PM
Had to actually register because I am a pedant and a RuneQuest nerd.

Never ever heard of a board game called RuneQuest. Glorantha did start out as board games, however - White Bear, Red Moon and Dragon Pass (two versions of the same game AFAIK, never played).

Glorantha itself has another modern RPG, which brings us to...


Actually, I'm pretty sure there's a non-warhammer related RP product of some kind that is, infact, also called HeroQuest.

HeroQuest was an old Games Workshop board game (there was also Advanced HeroQuest, and a later game in the same vein called Warhammer Quest).

HeroQuest (http://www.glorantha.com/) is also the current name of the Issaries, Inc. Glorantha RPG. It started out being called Hero Wars, and then GW's copyright to "HeroQuest" expired and it was snatched up (because the term "HeroQuest" has had a specific meaning in Gloranthan mythology for decades). Issaries is Greg Stafford's (father of Glorantha) current company, and the products are freaking amazing - the game system is okay (very storytelling-based), but the level of Glorantha lore in each product is astounding, and they are very light on the rules. I use all the Hero Wars/HeroQuest books for my RuneQuest games.

Glorantha absolutely is the best part of RuneQuest - you won't find a setting with more mythical verisimilitude, IMO. Some people don't like the frequent "Gregging" (changing "established facts"), but once you accept that all myths are simultaneously true and untrue, it's all gravy.

RuneQuest has gone through 5 versions now (Chaosium's 1st and 2nd, Avalon Hill's 3rd, Mongoose's 4th and now the brand new 5th). Changes have always been largely cosmetic, and improvement steady (the new 5th/MRQ2 is just excellent, with combat spiced up with very Riddle of Steel -style manoeuvres). And yeah, no one can settle on a name for battle/spirit/rune/common magic. I suspect "common magic" will stick, though, since it's now analoguous to HeroQuest's common magic - magic everyone can use, regardless of whether they're theist, animist, sorcerous, or mystic.

Mongoose's first edition of RuneQuest was pretty good, and incorporated so many ideas clearly taken from people who had been contributing to the RQ community since the Avalon Hill version went out of publication, and many ideas taken from Hero Wars/HeroQuest (I forget the comparative version timelines just now). It was wonderful to see they understood the value of the decades-old community of loyal fans (and angry grognards, naturally). Shannon Appel, for instance, wrote Mongoose's Guide to the Aldryami, and his elf works had been appearing in fanzines for years, making him something of a community elf expert.

(Warning, following is likely to confuse anyone not initiated into RuneQuest...)

There were some major kinks, though, and combat was really cumbersome. After a bunch of errata that didn't really do the trick, they came out with a new version just this year, and it looks to have fixed a lot. The combat changes feel like they're inspired by The Riddle of Steel (a wonderful and regrettably dead indie RPG with simply the best, most realistic, and smoothest combat system there is). Reach and manoeuvres make combat tactical and interesting, and reducing the number of actions and reactions (by using the same small pool of actions for both attack and defense) speeds up the fight. Also, rules for simplified locationless Pendragon-style hit points for minions and underlings make combat way quicker, since you no longer have to hammer at an enemy hoping to hit the same location 2-3 times to disable or kill.

Also, the magic systems have been altered majorly. Divine Magic still runs on dedicated POW (incidentally, not Mongoose's idea; it's from an old Tradetalk or Tales of the Reaching Moon fanzine) but now goes off two skills; Lore (deity) is the casting skill, and Pact (deity) determines both the power of the spells, and how fast you recover them, making runepriests and rune lords frightfully powerful.

Spirit magic no longer uses common/spirit/rune spells but with different rules. Instead, you use Spirit Walking and Spirit Binding to do what Gloranthan animism is supposed to: find spirits and either bind them or make deals with them. The spirits then provide you with all sorts of bonuses when you call on them, including improvements to stats (or derived stats; they can directly improve damage modifier, for instance), special abilities, or free combat manoeuvres. Again, very powerful once you can command powerful enough spirits.

Sorcery is simplified a bit, with - again - two skills: Sorcery (Grimoire) is used as the casting skill for all spells in that grimoire, and Manipulation determines the number of manipulation points you can give the spell. As usual, Sorcery is more subtly powerful.

I'm eagerly awaiting the new Cults book so I don't have to bother recreating all the divine spells (although most could be used straight from the older supplements; indeed, differences between editions are so small I could really use RQ1-3 spells without changes in most cases, although power levels might vary).

I'm not keen on the Second Age setting, but it makes perfect sense for Greg not to let people "mess around" with his Hero Wars age setting, and the Second Age material from Mongoose so far has been excellent (though I'm no expert on the period). The God Learner material in the Jrustela book, for instance, was simply awesome - although I'm still not clear on what their secret was! (Damn that Janaxian Extermination of Ideas!)

And yeah, King of Dragon Pass is one of the best computer strategy/simulation games ever. Prettiest graphics, too.


Edit: On lethality...

Adjust your strategies and expectations according to your power level. By default, RuneQuest is lethal (even though MRQ removed general hit points and increased locational hit points). My players never had any problems with lethality in some 15 years of RQ3. Sure, they got limbs lopped off all over the place, but you hit it with a Heal to stop from bleeding to death, and went on with killing the enemy. You'll get that Regrow Limb at the next Chalana Arroy temple. Naturally, you also stack Protection spells over the heaviest armor over armoring enchantment tattoos on your skin. They'd usually have allied or bound spirits or fetches ready with Heal spells, too, so they didn't have to waste time on it. I also used the popular houserule that characters don't die until a full round after the wound, unless it was something like decapitation; this actually led to some hilarious situations, like a Storm Bull fighting three broo rune lords and getting "killed" at least once each round.

Then again, with characters' main skills rising easily over 100% and even into 200%, my games can probably be accused of being the dread Super-RuneQuest. Fortunately, MRQ actually anticipated this - community awareness again - and accommodated skills way over 100% in the rules. But even earlier in the games, with low skills and little magic, they survived by good tactics, caution, and taking every advantage they could. It also helps that in Glorantha, your enemies are often human and not monsters trying to eat you; ransom and blood-prices play an important part of the social dynamic of combat.

Edit2: Also, MRQ2 removed the stupid MRQ "Runes" you had to integrate in order to use Rune magic. Rune-Touched is now just a special blessing you can acquire on HeroQuests, in Gloranthan lore, and whatever fits in other settings. It makes a lot of sense for Orlanth's Wind Lords, for instance, to have the Air Rune ability (less falling damage). The Runes no longer have anything to do with Common Magic, which is used with a single skill (and, incidentally, Gloranthans not only get it as a basic rather than advanced skill, but also get a +30% bonus).

lesser_minion
2010-06-30, 01:57 AM
HeroQuest (http://www.glorantha.com/) is also the current name of the Issaries, Inc. Glorantha RPG. It started out being called Hero Wars, and then GW's copyright

Actually, that would be a trademark.

Trademarks, copyrights, and patents are completely different issues that should not be confused and should not be lumped in together. (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml)

Comet
2010-06-30, 03:26 AM
*Lots and lots of information*

Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing! All this talk is making me feel like setting up a new RuneQuest campaign, honestly.



*More King of Dragon Pass love*

This is quickly turning into the best thread ever, isn't it? More high fives all around!

Satyr
2010-06-30, 04:04 AM
I like your 2d20/2 idea. Another (somewhat more realistic if you ask me) idea would be to give 200 extra skill points at the start (instead of 100) and make the max you can put in a skill 40. Then they can have a bunch of useful abilities.

I think that the random element and random talents for certain skills is neither very unrealistic nor un-fun; it takes a bit of time to create a character, sure, but hey, as a result your warior might also be a very talented singer or have a knack for dealing with animals and I like these small pecularities, as they make characters feel more organic. Besides, i think that all success chances all over the board of skills are too low and with increasing all skills, I have an approach to solve this particular issue.


So that the trollkin with a sharp stick can kill you with a lucky roll. (Oh look, it hits head. Ah, critical.) Then, if memory serves, it had fumbles. Gods I hate fumbles.

Well, this is highly subjective. I think that fights without any immanent danger are boring and tedious and since they do not add to the tension of the game, they are ultimately superfluous. As for fumbles, I miss them whenever they are not in a game and never really understood the disike. That said, Runequest had some ridiculous both tables, including a not so unlikely chance to decapitate yourself.

Hallavast
2010-06-30, 04:22 AM
The latest version of Runequest is OGL, so you should be able to find most of the rules online.



Does anybody care to provide a good link to the rules, then. It would help for those of us who've never played the game.

lesser_minion
2010-06-30, 04:30 AM
Does anybody care to provide a good link to the rules, then. It would help for those of us who've never played the game.

Turns out that was out of date. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runequest)

Apparently, there will be an SRD for the new version, but it hasn't been released yet.

Aroka
2010-06-30, 05:39 AM
Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing! All this talk is making me feel like setting up a new RuneQuest campaign, honestly.

This is quickly turning into the best thread ever, isn't it? More high fives all around!

Recipe for combining "new campaign" and "King of Dragon Pass":

Play King of Dragon Pass for one day, and write down all the interesting events.

Turn them into adventure hooks. (It's easily one adventure per event.)

Shake, bake, and play.


For way more information than you'll ever need on Dragon Pass and Sartar in the Hero Wars era (post-1600), try some absolutely stupendous HeroQuest books:

Sartar, Kingdom of Heroes
Dragon Pass, A Gazetteer of Kerofinela
Sartar Rising: Barbarian Adventures (Orlanth is Dead and Gathering Thunder are good, too, but they focus more on the opening shots of the Hero Wars, including the Battle of Iceland, which is the most epic thing outside of King of Sartar)


Edit: Also, because the online community for Glorantha and RuneQuest is freaking incredible, here's Ian Cooper's website (http://iancooper.brinkster.net/glorantha/sartar/redcow/redcow.html). Check out the Book of Red Cow Clan, downloadable from the top link on the right. It's fab (although it's HeroQuest, but the system stuff is a minority and easy to ignore). It's a great way to kick off a Heortling campaign in Dragon Pass.


Well, this is highly subjective. I think that fights without any immanent danger are boring and tedious and since they do not add to the tension of the game, they are ultimately superfluous. As for fumbles, I miss them whenever they are not in a game and never really understood the disike. That said, Runequest had some ridiculous both tables, including a not so unlikely chance to decapitate yourself.

Those ridiculous fumbles make some of the most fun moments at the table, though. Like the time our party's Sword of Humakt faced a magical doppelganger, and started the fight by fumbling and slicing his own leg clean off. He shouted "I'M JUST EVENING THE ODDS!" and went on to win the fight.

And then there's gems like this (http://www.soltakss.com/fumbles.html). (Simon Phipp's Super-Super-RuneQuest campaign material makes for awesome reading and great ideas, too.)


Does anybody care to provide a good link to the rules, then. It would help for those of us who've never played the game.

Sure. The old SRD was taken down from the Mongoose site and the new will probably be up in the next few months, but here's links to the free docs on Scribd (warning, page's will load slowly, but there's a download link on the side):

Core (http://www.scribd.com/doc/7691848/Runequest-SRD)
Companion (http://www.scribd.com/doc/7695311/Runequest-Companion-SRD)
Monsters (http://www.scribd.com/doc/7715491/RuneQuest-Monsters-SRD)

Unfortunately, some of the errata is pretty necessary (there's essentially a whole alternate combat mechanic using opposed tests), and as I describe above, there's some problems (slow and cumbersome combat, for instance). They shouldn't prevent play and certainly shouldn't affect enjoyment of Glorantha, if you get sourcebooks for the setting.

Here's some quick fixes (incorporated in the new edition) for combat:

Characters no longer get separate reactions; instead, they have to use their combat actions to both attack and defend. This means fewer attacks to resolve per round.
Only the most important enemies use locational hit points. Most enemies have General Hit Points equal to CON+SIZ (round up), and a Major Wound threshold of half that (round up). Taking a Major Wound will disable the enemy or cripple the location hit (if you bother rolling hit location, for instance when the enemy has different AP in different locations).
Even weaker monsters just have CON/2 General Hit Points, and are dead or unconscious when reduced to 0.


If you like the game, I think you'll like the new version at least as much, and combat looks much smoother (and the magic system fits Glorantha much better).

FYI, RuneQuest also has Elric, Hawkmoon, and Lankhmar sourcebooks, among others. (Very fitting, since the old Chaosium Stormbringer, Elric!, and Hawkmoon RPGs ran on essentially the same system as RuneQuest.)

potatocubed
2010-06-30, 06:08 AM
Ah, Spoonquest. It's good for when you want to run something less cinematic than D&D and less involved than Burning Wheel, and it's easier to learn than either. I recommend it highly.

My only complaint is that the last time I played (MRQ1), starting characters were marginally less competent than a stick of rhubarb. Perhaps I'll pick up MRQ2 and try running Blood of Orlanth with the new ruleset. That looks like a fun adventure.

Aroka
2010-06-30, 06:22 AM
Ah, Spoonquest. It's good for when you want to run something less cinematic than D&D and less involved than Burning Wheel, and it's easier to learn than either. I recommend it highly.

My only complaint is that the last time I played (MRQ1), starting characters were marginally less competent than a stick of rhubarb. Perhaps I'll pick up MRQ2 and try running Blood of Orlanth with the new ruleset. That looks like a fun adventure.

This is a common complaint, and I never quite get it - you can adjust starting character competency however you want, in all versions of RQ. In RQ3, a character in his early 20s has about 150-300 points to allocate in skills on top of the base scores (and cultural weapons). Granted, 100 free points in MRQ1 was a bit low, but it's not like it's a hard limit. In MRQ2, you get 250 points by default, and more if the starting characters are more experienced (an option from Companion in MRQ1, I think). That's a lot - you can easily get your main skills in the 60-70 % range, which is pretty decent (90% being rune-level/master skills).

Creating characters in RuneQuest has always been about context. If the campaign is about veteran Lunar hoplites, you're going to create melee monsters. If it's about Heortlings and starts right before their initiation at age 12-16, you get barely over starting skills. It's all very adjustable, just like starting D&D campaigns above 1st level, and setting a skill cap is an easy way to prevent overspecialization. ("Yeah, I have Dodge and 2H Sword at 150% and nothing else - so?")

Eldan
2010-06-30, 06:44 AM
In Dungeons and Dragons, you know who the enemies are and are expected to fight them head-on.
-Xavez

Strange. That doesn't seem to describe any D&D session I've ever been in. Finding out who the enemy actually is is the most interesting part of any campaign.

And really, what's a "run off the mill encounter"? The one where my players hired six corpse collectors with nets and posted them on rooftops to help them catch a ghoul? Then decided to spare the ghoul and recruit him for the Dustmen instead?
Or when I ran the same adventure with another group and they chained the ghoul and then forced him to show them his lair?

Oh, and another thing: why kill the orcs attacking you? Banditry may not warrant the death penalty. I've had players who would beat them up, take away their weapons, give them a stern talking-to and send them away.

Anyway... I haven't ever actually met anyone who played D&D the way you describe. Our very first adventure? The quest was to get children back the goblins had taken prisoner for an unknown reason. It involved an extended sneak mission, a goblin shop, a priest with a gigantic zombie forcing the goblins to do his bidding by keeping their women hostage, luring the zombie into a chasm, taking the priest prisoner with the help of the goblins and delivering him to the city guard.


As for fumbles: it's not that I have anything against the concept. Mostly, it's the implementation that makes them ridiculous. Consider D&D: you fumble on a roll of 1 on a D20. Fair enough, you'd thinK? Consider this: a fighter level 1 has 1 attack per turn, so a 1/20 chance of fumbling. A fighter level 20? He has four attacks per turn, and so has way more chances of fumbling. Yes, a better trained fighter fails more often.

Aroka
2010-06-30, 06:53 AM
There's really no rules differences that would make RuneQuest less or more a game of hack and slash than D&D; indeed, RuneQuest 1 and 2 (in the 70s and 80s) were all about going into the giant ruined part of Pavis and chopping up enemies, and adventures from that time bear a striking resemblance to old D&D modules. The inventiveness of the adventures was up to the people running them in both games.


Unrelated to the above, but tangential to the main topic, Mark Smylie's Artesia comics are very obviously inspired by Glorantha (he's even credited RuneQuest, Glorantha, and Stafford for much of the inspiration for the mythology), and they are completely awesome. In fact, after buying and devouring the RPG, Artesia: Adventures in the Known World (written entirely by the wonderfully megalomanic and obsessive Smylie; it's based on the Fuzion system but bears scant resemblance to Cyberpunk 2020), I was struck by how good it would be for playing in Glorantha. Lethal and realistic combat, awesome heroes with magical and mythical abilities, very scaleable power levels...

Edit: D&D players should know Smylie from the illustrations he's done for WotC. The 3.0 Faiths and Pantheons illustrations of Kelemvor and Helm (and some others, I think) are by Smylie, as are a number of illustrations in Complete Warrior (the Purple Dragon Knight, at least). Basically, any time you see a D&D illustration with beautifully realistic and awesomely detailed armor and weapons, that's Smylie.

lesser_minion
2010-06-30, 06:57 AM
Strange. That doesn't seem to describe any D&D session I've ever been in. Finding out who the enemy actually is is the most interesting part of any campaign.

And really, what's a "run off the mill encounter"? The one where my players hired six corpse collectors with nets and posted them on rooftops to help them catch a ghoul? Then decided to spare the ghoul and recruit him for the Dustmen instead?
Or when I ran the same adventure with another group and they chained the ghoul and then forced him to show them his lair?

Agreed. The first successful D&D adventure I ran, my players spent at least half the adventure thinking that the clichéd death cultists were good guys.

Aroka
2010-06-30, 07:15 AM
I mentioned the combat manoeuvres, and other combat changes apparently lifted from The Riddle of Steel, so I guess I might explain them a bit (to clarify why I think MRQ2 combat is superior to all previous versions).

Combat manoeuvres are offensive and defensive manoeuvres you get to use when you score a success level higher than your opponents when attacking. It's the same old resolution system, with small differences: you have a single skill value for attack and defense, and skills are based on combat style rather than weapon - like Sword & Shield or Two Swords, rather than just 1H Sword. You roll to attack, your opponent rolls to parry. Here the differences start:

Weapon size determines the efficiency of the parry. If you try to parry a greataxe with a dagger, all the damage gets through. Try to parry a shortsword with a dagger, you only halve the damage. Sword with kite shield, though, and you're good - all the damage is blocked. (There's combat manoeuvres for increasing the effective size of your weapon, both for attack and defense; and heroic abilities for both.)

The difference of success levels determines who gets to pick a manoeuvre. A success beats a failure by one, so you'd get one manoeuvre. A critical beats a failure by two, so you'd get two, plus access to critical-only manoeuvres (like Bypass Armour and Maximize Damage). Some manoeuvres depend on your weapon - cutting weapons can Bleed (a terrifyingly effective manoeuvre that will fatigue an opponent by one level each round, practically guaranteeing victory if they lack basic healing magic), piercing weapons Impale, and so on.

Reach plays a part, too. Weapons have a reach value, and if the difference is larger than one step (say, one-handed axe or sword against longspear), there's an advantage. At first, the longer weapon has the advantage: the fighter with the shorter weapon can't attack! (Except in the case of monsters' natural weapons: you can attack the attacking bodypart in response.) However, you can use a combat action to try to close in (in which case your opponent can try to elude you, OR can take a free shot you can't defend against); or you can use a combat manoeuvre gained from a good parry roll to do it automatically. Once you're inside your opponent's reach, the advantage is yours - your opponent can attack but cannot parry, and needs to change the distance (just as you did).

The manoeuvres and other actions available make combat wonderfully tactical, full of little choices that make a difference, and make various combinations of weapons a very legitimate choice. (Shields are excellent, for instance, because there's no weapon you can't defend against with one; but then your opponent can try to pin your shield to leave you wide open...)

This also makes combat with huge monsters much more interesting. Sure, that dragon is a terrible opponent, but if you can close in on it, it can't attack you until it changes the distance. It's probably the first combat mechanic I've seen where you can really turn an opponent's size against it in such a cool way.

Summa summarum, MRQ2 combat is more complex than old RuneQuest combat (obviously, you can scrap all the manoeuvre stuff and just use the old critical rules, and there's no problem), but it's also much more interesting than just "attack parry cast attack dodge." Tactical combat full of choices is always good.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-30, 09:55 AM
There's really no rules differences that would make RuneQuest less or more a game of hack and slash than D&D; indeed, RuneQuest 1 and 2 (in the 70s and 80s) were all about going into the giant ruined part of Pavis and chopping up enemies, and adventures from that time bear a striking resemblance to old D&D modules. The inventiveness of the adventures was up to the people running them in both games.

It's less of a hack-and-slash in RuneQuest because you don't gain hp as you get more experienced, so you tend to have low-medium hp even when enemies' weapon skills are at 80% or higher (later on in the game). If you don't want to roll up new characters every session, you would tend to shy away from combat a bit more.
-Xavez
P.S. @Aroka: I <3 you and your walls of text! (in a buddies sort of way:smallbiggrin:)

Aroka
2010-06-30, 10:16 AM
It's less of a hack-and-slash in RuneQuest because you don't gain hp as you get more experienced, so you tend to have low-medium hp even when enemies' weapon skills are at 80% or higher (later on in the game). If you don't want to roll up new characters every session, you would tend to shy away from combat a bit more.

Well, yes and no. Your general hit points don't go up, except when you find ways to pump up your CON permanently (in RQ3, you could train it up to the higher of your STR and SIZ), but your locational hit points can be increased with strengthening enchantments, and your skin can be armored. In our longest-running campaign, the PCs had the protection of plate (so AP 8) while naked, and usually double hit points on all locations. Then stack on actual armor (maybe two layers; a common rule in most games AFAIK) and Protection or Shield spells. And that's not counting the absolute pile of healing magic and the hundreds of magic points they had available in matrixes, bound spirits, and crystals. And the healing spells were usually cast through a crystal that empowered them, too...

High-level RuneQuest characters - especially in so-called "Super-RuneQuest" - can be incredibly hardy. Of course, they're going to go up against similarly powerful enemies. For every protective or healing spell, there's two spells to deal more damage. I mentioned the fight where the Storm Bull was killed at least once every round before; that was two PCs (not quite as powerful as above) against three rune-level broos, and they barely got away alive thanks to a huge sylph they had bound. The other PC - a shaman responsible for the pair's magical support - had all four of his limbs Withered into uselessness, and the sylph was almost killed by enchanted missile fire.

Old RuneQuest did start to tear apart at the corners at power levels like that (but it could be patched up and taken up a few orders of magnitude beyond; check out the insane stuff from Phipp's campaign (http://www.soltakss.com/stats013.html)), but the Mongoose versions hold up better, IMO.

Gloranthan fluff, incidentally, assumes resurrection magic for heroes, and I can't think of other settings that actually incorporate it into the fabric of the world. When someone dies, they are held for display for a week (the time a soul stays on the Path of the Dead before reaching the Underworld; once there, regular spells can't bring it back) before funeral rites take place, because everyone knows that magic - and especially a healers' prayers - can bring the dead back. Indeed, some heroes are so incredibly heroic they just spring back up on their own after a few days.

For some more Gloranthan high-power magic integrated into the setting, check out this awesome short story: Morden Defends the Camp (http://www.glorantha.com/index.php?page_id=913).


Morden, as had Brekun before him, screamed the Widow’s Howl, and every small creature which was within hearing of that shout fell down dead. The Widow’s Shout wasn’t a novel thing to these Orgovaltes warriors, and Hakorlat had used it often himself. The warriors held tight to the reins and rode hard.

...

Arkarthan never saw the razor edged shield which slashed through his abdomen as he landed. The thief was cut right in half, and the hurtling shield caused them to fall separately, apart from each other.

Arkarthan had been killed once before, but of course he was still stunned. He — his spirit — stood there, crouched and poised holding the magical sword before him, and he looked over his shoulder at his legs kicking and his liver flapping, and lots and lots of blood everywhere ruining his good clothes. He hadn’t been ready for that shield trick, but he knew what to do when he was killed.

He knew that if he could move his spirit quickly enough, he could pull his two parts together and he would be knit within seconds. He had prepared to be healed like this a long time ago. He was informed. He could do it.

Glorantha is, indeed, a setting where you can play Heroes rather than heroes. It's a large part of why I love it.

RuneQuest, admittedly, has always gone for a grittier style than the style of the "modern" Glorantha presented in HeroQuest sourcebooks and stories. Your characters don't have to have piles of powerful and unique magic; they can be dirty survivors in the Big Rubble of Pavis, or hoplites humping it with the Lunar legions, or a bunch of deranged and desperate loners and losers clawing their way toward the top of the hierarchy of a Chaotic headhunter cult (that adventure is just awesome).


Edit:

Of course, for all that the game allows for hack-and-slash, my own preferences run toward 1-2 fights each session (because it's part of the fun of RPGs), and I try to make them "contextually important"; there are many social reasons to fight, as well as mythical and personal reasons, and these always have consequences and are tied to a larger context. Fighting as part of a blood-feud, taking part in a raid, facing a mythical enemy of your people, and so on. To me, RuneQuest is about Glorantha, and Glorantha is about the social and magical/metaphysical/religious consequences of your choices, failures, and triumphs.

For the last few years, most fights in my RuneQuest campaigns have been with human enemies, and mostly ones you are socially encouraged to not kill; the common laws governing both parties stipulate ransoms and blood-prices, and anyone you kill is going to have family and allies who will want revenge, and you rarely benefit anything by provoking such animosity. Sometimes, though, you have to let loose with undead or Chaos monsters, but the tenacity and lethal ferocity of these enemies is much more impressive when it's contrasted by humans who surrender or pass out after having a limb crippled.

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-30, 10:22 AM
After hearing it twice, I need to know:

What exactly is AFAIK? A horrible mutilation of Africa? A fake? What is it?
-Xavez

Aroka
2010-06-30, 10:25 AM
What exactly is AFAIK? A horrible mutilation of Africa? A fake? What is it?

An initialism (or acronym) for "as far as I know." (http://www.chatref.com/)

Darklord Xavez
2010-06-30, 02:59 PM
An initialism (or acronym) for "as far as I know." (http://www.chatref.com/)

I see. Thanks!
-Xavez