Mythras/Runequest - how good at pulp heroic fantasy swords-and-sorcery?

[Fenris-77]

Raleel is cool guy, as well a great RQ/Mythras designer and whatnot.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

These transform combat from a meat-grinder into a play for advantage, which might end with someone surrendering rather than getting chopped up into pieces, which is usually how older RQ combat ended.

Still, special effects do not replace damage, they add to it, and fights tend to be on the deadlier side. The GM really has some work to do to make sure they play with the special effects to encourage the game style they want to emulate. Coming from other systems, some players might assume a level-appropriate challenge rating for enemies they'll defeat through HP attrition, which isn't the right approach to fighting in Mythras against a "named" opponent. It's not "intuitive" depending on where you come from to get it right (and think of Trip + Compel Surrender a viable alternative to "let's chop his head off... again and again".

Mythras is on the crunchy side so the main issue with the system from my point of view is the amount of work a GM has to do to prepare running a campaign, because you need to decide what you are and are not going to use. For example, as elegant as the sorcery system is, I don't think it is a good one for players given its complexity and potential power. By contrast, the other magic systems are perfectly suited to a S&S campaign. Folk Magic is good for witches, Theism for cults, Mysticism for wushu types, Animism does a better job than any version of RQ at representing spirits, and how the living relate to them.

Sorcery, if you go with low MP generation and sacrifices as a source of power, has a very Howardian feel for NPCs. I'd keep it in their hand but make sure PCs have some way to access healing magic, though.

 

[Bilharzia]

Still, special effects do not replace damage, they add to it

yes but

(and think of Trip + Compel Surrender a viable alternative to "let's chop his head off... again and again".

Suggests that effectively SEs can replace damage...

Special Effects are the big differentiator between Mythras and the other BRP games. IF players and the GM are interested in a more detailed combat system, SEs change the game.

Sorcery, if you go with low MP generation and sacrifices as a source of power, has a very Howardian feel for NPCs. I'd keep it in their hand but make sure PCs have some way to access healing magic, though.

Sorcery can work great for NPCs, and Monster Island provides some excellent new spells and traits (the whole campaign is a tribute to Clark Ashton Smith). I find the mechanics of sorcery just horrible to use in play though, despite RQ6/Mythras fixing the problems with RQ3 I still don't think it is worth using.

Lower magics, or even non-magical tricks are represented well by Folk Magic. Conan encounters plenty of witches and spirit-magic users that Animism represents very well, and even a few priests make Theism a good fit. All of these work well pretty much out of the book for a S&S game, just not sorcery, unfortunately for a Sword & Sorcery game.

 

[Rogerd1]

yes but

Suggests that effectively SEs can replace damage...

Special Effects are the big differentiator between Mythras and the other BRP games. IF players and the GM are interested in a more detailed combat system, SEs change the game.


Sorcery can work great for NPCs, and Monster Island provides some excellent new spells and traits (the whole campaign is a tribute to Clark Ashton Smith). I find the mechanics of sorcery just horrible to use in play though, despite RQ6/Mythras fixing the problems with RQ3 I still don't think it is worth using.

Lower magics, or even non-magical tricks are represented well by Folk Magic. Conan encounters plenty of witches and spirit-magic users that Animism represents very well, and even a few priests make Theism a good fit. All of these work well pretty much out of the book for a S&S game, just not sorcery, unfortunately for a Sword & Sorcery game.

The trouble here is that out of the box, even with the Companion, Mythras cannot do Conan as seen in the comics. That would take Champions or M&M, or SWADE, or a game engine like them.

Now the Companion, to make this distinction could, just, do Conan movies, or Batman (Bale). But it has absolutely no chance, likely even with Destined, to manage comic Bats or Conan.

 

[Bilharzia]

The trouble here is that out of the box, even with the Companion, Mythras cannot do Conan as seen in the comics. That would take Champions or M&M, or SWADE, or a game engine like them.

Now the Companion, to make this distinction could, just, do Conan movies, or Batman (Bale). But it has absolutely no chance, likely even with Destined, to manage comic Bats or Conan.

I think you are dead wrong, and I do not understand your focus on the Companion supplement, it does very little for a S&S game frankly.

I am not sure what the superhero genre has to do with Sword & Sorcery? they are more like opposites.

If you read the Conan stories, or indeed most of the comics if they are faithful, the action is quite down to earth and Conan is far from a superhero. This is the nature of Sword & Sorcery. Looking more broadly at weird fiction this is even moreso the case. The "heroes" of those stories are quite vulnerable.

Mythras does the genre very well when it comes to power level and survivability. Luck Points go a long way to help PCs survive, group luck points if the GM wants to be generous. The real stumbling block is the complexity of the system, and how much of it you want to use. For example as far as combat goes, I do not use "Reach", and I got rid of cycles, using a Rounds-only combat turn. This simplifies the action significantly while still keeping Special Effects and everything else.

 

[Rogerd1]

I think you are dead wrong, and I do not understand your focus on the Companion supplement, it does very little for a S&S game frankly.

I am not sure what the superhero genre has to do with Sword & Sorcery? they are more like opposites.

If you read the Conan stories, or indeed most of the comics if they are faithful, the action is quite down to earth and Conan is far from a superhero. This is the nature of Sword & Sorcery. Looking more broadly at weird fiction this is even moreso the case. The "heroes" of those stories are quite vulnerable.

Mythras does the genre very well when it comes to power level and survivability. Luck Points go a long way to help PCs survive, group luck points if the GM wants to be generous. The real stumbling block is the complexity of the system, and how much of it you want to use. For example as far as combat goes, I do not use "Reach", and I got rid of cycles, using a Rounds-only combat turn. This simplifies the action significantly while still keeping Special Effects and everything else.

The quotes below are from the Mythras Companion.

Think of Conan, James Bond, Jason Bourne, Doc Savage, Batman – or any number of popular heroic characters.
Pulp Hero Characters These are traditional Pulp Heroes. They aren’t superheroes or demigods, and a well-placed shotgun blast will still end their life, but they are tougher, smarter, more able, and in general, a step or two above ordinary people. Also, their lives tend to be filled with adventure. While a Heroic character can choose to attempt to settle down and lead an uneventful life, often trouble or someone in need will find their way to the character’s door

While Indiana Jones and James Bond are Pulp Heroic characters, Conan, Doc Savage, Batman, and Sherlock Holmes are Paragon characters. Paragon characters aren’t merely supremely competent in one area of expertise, they usually excel at several. A brilliant inventor and physicist who is also a two-fisted, crack-shot war hero, is an excellent example of a Paragon character; A billionaire playboy crime fighter who studied with the finest detective minds in the world is another. Paragon characters may well have several college degrees, independent wealth, mysterious benefactors, as well as numerous other forms of experience.

You have no idea what you're talking about, clearly, as the Companion has everything to do about upping the level of the game. And even those options will not let you play Conan from the Marvel comics when he battles Thor. It just will not, and trying to say otherwise is a lie.

Using the Companion will let you do Conan from the Arnie movies, just, by using the two filters from the Companion - but otherwise, it won't.

I am not sure what the superhero genre has to do with Sword & Sorcery? they are more like opposites.

Rubbish. They are all about the level of realism from the setting being portrayed.
In the same way that Modern Age has Gritty, Pulp, and Cinematic.

Movie Conan, Batman (Bale) are both fairly gritty in their portryal.
Marvel Conan would be cinematic. So yeah, they have everything to do with one another.

 

[Bilharzia]

Conan from the Marvel comics when he battles Thor. It just will not, and trying to say otherwise is a lie.

yeah, ok, says it all...
You want the system to support Conan battling Thor, and if it does not then it's incapable of supporting Sword & Sorcery .... right you are.

 

[S'mon]

Marvel Comics Conan is basically a superhero. The first SSOC I ever bought, he duels and kills a literal god!

 

[Rogerd1]

I think you are dead wrong, and I do not understand your focus on the Companion supplement, it does very little for a S&S game frankly.

Your statement is above.

Think of Conan, James Bond, Jason Bourne, Doc Savage, Batman – or any number of popular heroic characters.
Pulp Hero Characters These are traditional Pulp Heroes. They aren’t superheroes or demigods, and a well-placed shotgun blast will still end their life, but they are tougher, smarter, more able, and in general, a step or two above ordinary people. Also, their lives tend to be filled with adventure. While a Heroic character can choose to attempt to settle down and lead an uneventful life, often trouble or someone in need will find their way to the character’s door

While Indiana Jones and James Bond are Pulp Heroic characters, Conan, Doc Savage, Batman, and Sherlock Holmes are Paragon characters. Paragon characters aren’t merely supremely competent in one area of expertise, they usually excel at several. A brilliant inventor and physicist who is also a two-fisted, crack-shot war hero, is an excellent example of a Paragon character; A billionaire playboy crime fighter who studied with the finest detective minds in the world is another. Paragon characters may well have several college degrees, independent wealth, mysterious benefactors, as well as numerous other forms of experience.

I then stated that Mythras alone will not allow you to portray Conan, and to do it properly requires the Companion, and did so by quoting the salient text. I also said that Pulp characters are a bit weak, and so too are the Paragon level ones.

Is Mythras a good system? Yes, absolutely it is.
Is there lots of different magic, again yes.

But the game is geared to core fundamentals of play, so unless you alter those fundaments.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

yes but

Suggests that effectively SEs can replace damage...

Yes you're right. I am bad at communicating my idea I meant that even if you don't have to fight to the death thanks to SEs, there is a strong risk to incur a serious wound during a fight, especially a series of fights, for the PCs even if both sides use SEs. I wanted to underline that fights are a serious thing in Mythras (but I feel it matches S&S quite well).

Sorcery can work great for NPCs, and Monster Island provides some excellent new spells and traits (the whole campaign is a tribute to Clark Ashton Smith). I find the mechanics of sorcery just horrible to use in play though, despite RQ6/Mythras fixing the problems with RQ3 I still don't think it is worth using.

I kind of like them... except they don't have the corrupting effect (in regular Mythras) one would expect from Howardian sorcery.