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

Tue Nov 5 15:05:02 UTC 2013

I would suggest you use Pathfinder rules and the following classes:

Fighter
Ranger
Barbarian
Rogue
Bard (use the divine version)
Wizard
Sorcerer (as Shamans)

Paladin as a prestige class
Druid as prestige class

Depending on your game, you may want to limit the upper level of advancement to 6th. There is a set of rules to handle it called e6. Google for it.  There are also Optional rules for Armor reducing damage instead of just deflecting. You may want to check them out.

LEon

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 11/5/13, Alban de ROSTOLAN <aluban at yahoo.fr> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Runequest] Pete's RQ updates & D&D conversion notes
 To: "RuneQuest Rules" <runequest at rpgreview.net>
 Date: Tuesday, November 5, 2013, 6:37 AM

 Hello all,

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

 -Fighter
 -Expert (from Unearthed Arcana)
 -Initiate
 -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.

 ->Peter
 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?

 Leon

 --------------------------------------------

 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

 http://mail.rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net

 _______________________________________________

 Runequest mailing list

 Runequest at rpgreview.net

 http://mail.rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net

 _______________________________________________
 Runequest mailing list
 Runequest at rpgreview.net
 http://mail.rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net

 -----Inline Attachment Follows-----

 _______________________________________________
 Runequest mailing list
 Runequest at rpgreview.net
 http://mail.rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net