BRP The Edition Wars To End All Wars

[ReluctantGM]

That is all fine and good, but I feel the potential of Ducks as a spell caster race is seldom debated:

I'm pretty sure I played in this module back in the day.

 

[Spellslinging Sellsword]

That is all fine and good, but I feel the potential of Ducks as a spell caster race is seldom debated:

Man, Daffy and Bugs aside, that fantasy world looks pretty cool. I'd have loved to see a full blown series set in that world with that animation. Would have been epic!

 

[Raleel]

Man, Daffy and Bugs aside, that fantasy world looks pretty cool. I'd have loved to see a full blown series set in that world with that animation. Would have been epic!

very S&S. very fantastical. Straight out of one of the old authors.

 

[CRKrueger]

That is all fine and good, but I feel the potential of Ducks as a spell caster race is seldom debated:

Heh 2011. Couldn’t make that today.

 

[Baragei]

And because it is related to the topic, here's the official character write-up from TDM's Pete Nash:


The Wizard (Duck)(RQ6 Stats)

STR: 7
CON: 14
SIZ: 9
DEX: 13
INT: 19
POW: 18
CHA: 9

Action Points: 3
Damage Modifier: -1d2
Magic Points: 18
Movement: 4m walking
Strike Rank: +16
Armour: Feathers

1d20 Hit Location AP/HP
1-3 Right Leg 0/5
4–6 Left Leg 0/5
7–9 Abdomen 1/6
10–12 Chest 1/7
13–15 Right Arm 1/4
16–18 Left Arm 1/4
19–20 Head 1/5

Magic: Invocation 118%, Shaping 123%; Spells Known: Wrack (Lightning from sky), Animate (Rock, Water), Draw (Reptiles), Wrack (Heating Flesh from Within), Enslave (Dinosaurs), Transmogrify (Armour to Lingerie), Imprison, Chronogrammatical Binding (see Monster Island), Project (Sight, Hearing), Fly, Spell Resistance, Damage Resistance, Protective Ward, Portal (to Insatiable Gort),

Item: Staff of Wizardry, if invested with a Magic Point allows all targets within range of the magic to be subjected to the next spell cast.

Skills: Athletics: 54%, Boating: 47%, Brawn: 38%, Conceal: 44%, Courtesy: 50%, Customs: 82%, Dance: 65%, Deceit: 75%, Endurance: 68%, Evade: 57%, First Aid: 43%, Healing 69%, Influence: 91%, Insight: 84%, Literacy (Ancient Texts): 107%, Locale: 82%, Lore (Dimensions): 67%, Lore (History): 87%, Lore (Powers of the Ancients): 73%, Native Tongue: 102%, Perception: 79%, Ride (Dragon): 79%, Sing: 47%, Sleight: 55%, Stealth: 57%, Swim: 77%, Willpower: 99%

Combat Style: Imperious Stare (Staff, Unarmed – Intimidate, as per Creature Trait): 79%

Passions: Be Worshipped 109%, Desire Beautiful Females 87%, Claim the Ultimate Power! 132%

 

[Ossian]

I'm skimming thru the new OpenQuest 3rd edition pdf, it was sent to kickstarter backers a week ago..

...

One thing I find really weird is why there is an anthromorphic duck-person with the adventurers on the front cover, especially considering that OQ is meant to be distancing itself from Glorantha?

View attachment 27334

For those who missed the OpenQuest kickstarter, and are interested, the book is being offered as an add on to the Kickstarter to Grogzilla #2, an OpenQuest magazine featuring a Duck themed adventure.

From OpenQuestrpg.com: "At the heart of it is an OpenQuest powered adventure called the Duck Crusade, which is a Grimdark Quest with a firm sense of humour, much like the early GW Warhammer Fantasy Battle releases (McDeath for example). It features the Crusader Ducks of Fort Fury, who are trying to regain their homeland which has been overrun by Cultists of Corruption who worship the Great Terror Lizard, GROGZILLA!

The Duck Crusade is a one-shot adventure, with its own self contained setting and a set of six pre-made duck characters, so you can just pick it up and play it in one to two gaming sessions."

 

[Toadmaster]

The degree of abstraction you’re working with is informed by the type of game you’re running.

One day I was toying with the idea of a medical drama powered by Mythras because it occurred to me that you could use a system similar to Combat Styles to model medical specialties.

And let’s not get into the lack of skills for whole healthcare careeers — I’ve never seen a game feature Nursing, Pharmacy or Physical Therapy skills, for instance.

If you’re a stickler for “realism” you either get into crazy granular skill lists, or a more free form take on your PC’s talents, like FATE Aspects, Sine Nomine’s focus or the build-your-own-skills rules in Wild Talents’ Kerberos Club setting book.

I also liked how Mayfair’s DC Heroes RPG had very broad skills and used the Scholar Advantage to reflect specialized training. So you had far-reaching skills like Gadgetry and Scientist, and applied a bonus if you had, say, Scholar (robotics) when you were studying (with Scientist) or piecing together (with Gadgetry) a robot.

But as a GM I usually default to genre-appropriate levels of abstraction and roll with it.

That last bit is why I like complementary skills. Then you can have broad skills that combined sort of create new skills. When combined with a reasonable default it can work nicely. I have a love / hate relationship with expanding skills based on character background. When it works it can be great, but when it doesn't it can be grossly abused or nerfed to the point of worthlessness.

I like the idea of a non-combat focused game, as you suggest for a medical game but I've never really seen one that worked. I've thought many times about how to make a game based on a fire department, with fighting fires, performing rescues, responding to medical emergencies etc. I always get hung up on where to draw the line on detail. I've found the few on the market dumb it down way to much for me to enjoy. If I can't approach the game as I would a real life scenario, I'm not interested. It just becomes make believe in a not fun way for me. On the other hand you can't expect a player to go through a fire academy just to play the game. I have found some computer games that were decent and managed to bridge the gap between training simulator and Saturday morning cartoon, not sure why it is so hard for a board game or RPG.

I'm also a bit of a sim nerd though, like I could actually enjoy a board game game where you are an administrator trying to strike the right balance of staffing, budget and community needs as a city planner building the cities services (yes I geek out on this aspect of Simcity).

I like ducks in my BRP. I was a huge fan of Howard the Duck before I ever heard of RQ and when I heard that you could play a duck in RQ I was suddenly very interested!

Of course, it's an utterly trivial task to eliminate ducks from your OQ game. Just as it is to swap them for halflings.

I don't mind the ducks and I've never understood the duck hate. They are a quirky feature that is easily eliminated or changed so the idea I've seen people spout that RQ is silly because ducks, is well just silly.

 

[Simlasa]

Like I keep mentioning, I've been reading through a HUGE book of old fairy tales and there have been a number of ducks, enchanted or not. Loads of animal characters/companions in general of course.
So why are ducks any sillier than dogs/cats/bears/rats? Just their association with Donald, Daffy and Howard?

 

[Paragon]

And let’s not get into the lack of skills for whole healthcare careeers — I’ve never seen a game feature Nursing, Pharmacy or Physical Therapy skills, for instance.

I've seen at least Nursing and Pharmacy (sometimes lumped in with Pharmacology) in a couple of really splitty post apocalypse or SF games. The usual reason you don't see that distinction is that in most games they'd never get used--they're jobs that end up getting farmed out to NPCs in civilized settings, and the situations where that can't be done come up so rarely that they'd just lay fallow.

If you’re a stickler for “realism” you either get into crazy granular skill lists, or a more free form take on your PC’s talents, like FATE Aspects, Sine Nomine’s focus or the build-your-own-skills rules in Wild Talents’ Kerberos Club setting book.

You also can get placeholder skill categories like Hero System Professions and Sciences, too.

That’s good to know. I have this nagging suspicion that one day I might run Mythras, be disappointed at the GM-side workload and dial the game back to OQ.

I didn't end up finding my Mythras game entirely satisfactory (but that had as much to do with trying to use it for a slightly more high magic setting than it really wants to handle as anything else, and the rest of it is that maybe too much of my group is really big over big linear resolution systems), but I can't say I find it that much more difficult to handle than classic RQ, if that helps.

 

[CRKrueger]

Like I keep mentioning, I've been reading through a HUGE book of old fairy tales and there have been a number of ducks, enchanted or not. Loads of animal characters/companions in general of course.
So why are ducks any sillier than dogs/cats/bears/rats? Just their association with Donald, Daffy and Howard?

Well, unlike all those listed above, Ducks are a prey species, not a predator, so we don’t think of them as badass. Secondly, thanks to every anthropomorphic duck in history sounding absolutely ridiculous, they’re automatically a joke species.

 

[Simlasa]

Well, unlike all those listed above, Ducks are a prey species, not a predator, so we don’t think of them as badass. Secondly, thanks to every anthropomorphic duck in history sounding absolutely ridiculous, they’re automatically a joke species.

Well, my list of fairy tale animals was random... there are also birds, horses, geese, fish, frogs, etc... but ducks are omnivores, like bears, and have prey of their own... frogs, fish, crayfish.
Also, the duck in Peter and the Wolf doesn't sound ridiculous... unless you hate oboes.

 

[Toadmaster]

Well, my list of fairy tale animals was random... there are also birds, horses, geese, fish, frogs, etc... but ducks are omnivores, like bears, and have prey of their own... frogs, fish, crayfish.
Also, the duck in Peter and the Wolf doesn't sound ridiculous... unless you hate oboes.

View attachment 27380

One of my favorite childhood books, about Jerome a frog cursed by a witch to become a prince, although one who looked like a frog. He was a bad ass saving the skeptical townspeople from giant crows, dragons and wizards.

 

[ReluctantGM]

I HAVE NOTHING BUT LOVE AND REVERENCE FOR JEROME!

Erm ...

I, too, have fond memories of that book.

 

[Toadmaster]

I HAVE NOTHING BUT LOVE AND REVERENCE FOR JEROME!

Erm ...

I, too, have fond memories of that book.

It is a fantastic book, and it saddens me that it isn't better represented. A one time publishing and presumably the rights still held by a company that no longer publishes books (Parents Magazine). Fantastic 1960s psychedelic artwork worthy of album covers, and a neat story where the hero solves problems by talking to people (err things) although the threat of violence is suggested. If I had money there would be an amazing animated film of Jerome.

 

[Mankcam]

Well, unlike all those listed above, Ducks are a prey species, not a predator, so we don’t think of them as badass. Secondly, thanks to every anthropomorphic duck in history sounding absolutely ridiculous, they’re automatically a joke species.

Yes and Ducks were also a joke for Stafford and his hippie rpg pals, but they made canon so he worked the Ducks into Gloranthan lore, he liked keeping some things quirky.

They are not a big part of Glorantha, and very easily ignored, yet sometimes they have more profile than what one would expect.

Fair enough, Glorantha has random sentient animals as well, so it's quirky in parts, despite the authentic flavour of the overall setting.

I still find it odd the profile that Newt puts on Ducks now that OQ is distancing itself from Glorantha. I would understand an assortment of anthromorphic animal races could appeal to some, but just pushing Ducks all the time feels to close to Glorantha.

I do love Glorantha, I don't hate the Ducks, but they just aren't a big thing in Glorantha, they only have a few small settlements in the entire world, and occasionally they are seen adventuring.

I just feel that OpenQuest should be more it's own thing by now - it is ideal for fantasy homebrew.

 

[Mankcam]

As far as doing a home brew with OQ, I am considering porting The Witcher setting to it, or creating my own Grimm Fairie Tale fable-like setting for it.

The later I considered once for Magic World, but I think OQ is more my thing for it.

 

[Simlasa]

Fair enough, Glorantha has random sentient animals as well, so it's quirky in parts, despite the authentic flavour of the overall setting.

Sentient animals seem like they SHOULD be part of an 'authentic' mythological setting. So IMO they work to support it, not against it.
And just because OQ has ducks doesn't mean they are the Durulz... OQ has set them free to be whatever you like. Its trolls certainly aren't the RQ variety either.

 

[The Butcher]

As far as doing a home brew with OQ, I am considering porting The Witcher setting to it, or creating my own Grimm Fairie Tale fable-like setting for it.

The later I considered once for Magic World, but I think OQ is more my thing for it.

I’ve generally found Openquest a better toolbox than Magic World. Hell, it may be better than Mythras in some respects and I adore Mythras.

 

[K_Peterson]

I've owned a couple editions of OpenQuest over a decade or so, but have never found it interesting enough that I'd want to run it. IMO, it occupies a weak space between the abstraction of Magic World, and the grit of MRQII/Legend/MRQ6/Mythras. I guess I'm more into the cold-hot extremes of BRP-play than the lukewarm water of OQ.

One thing I've never been able to get past with OQ are the skill categorizations, and how starting skill points are divided among them. I like pools of skill points divided based on occupational skills (CoC); I like skill points divided up based on culture, profession, and free-spend (MRQII/Legend/Mythras). I don't like category spends based on .... arbitrary values? (Maybe those values were defined in MRQ1??).

 

[Mankcam]

I've owned a couple editions of OpenQuest over a decade or so, but have never found it interesting enough that I'd want to run it. IMO, it occupies a weak space between the abstraction of Magic World, and the grit of MRQII/Legend/MRQ6/Mythras. I guess I'm more into the cold-hot extremes of BRP-play than the lukewarm water of OQ.

One thing I've never been able to get past with OQ are the skill categorizations, and how starting skill points are divided among them. I like pools of skill points divided based on occupational skills (CoC); I like skill points divided up based on culture, profession, and free-spend (MRQII/Legend/Mythras). I don't like category spends based on .... arbitrary values? (Maybe those values were defined in MRQ1??).

I don't mind how OQ does Skills.

They are grouped in Skill Categories so its easy to find what you are looking for, just like RQ.

Also the base skill chances are calculated by adding two Characteristics/Attributes - I really like this idea.
Mythras does the same thing, and it feels very logical to me.
It makes the Attributes feel more meaningful - Chaosium originally did this in ElfQuest, and I've liked it since then.

 

[Paragon]

The only problem with the "two attribute total" approach is I can't help but think a few more skills should have higher starting bases than just the default given there, but otherwise its a sound approach.

 

[ffilz]

The only problem with the "two attribute total" approach is I can't help but think a few more skills should have higher starting bases than just the default given there, but otherwise its a sound approach.

Also, with the 2 attribute total system, how are skills that can't be used untrained handled? Do attributes never come into play with them?

With RQ1 I have taken to giving characters a bonus for experience of their Ability Bonus for the skill. I was also considering that for training but made it too easy to train at high skill levels. Another option would be a training cost reduction but there's already such a cost reduction for Charisma.

 

[K_Peterson]

Also, with the 2 attribute total system, how are skills that can't be used untrained handled?

Often, you just can't make those types of skill rolls. They might be considered advanced skills, requiring you to either purchase them during chargen, or get some training in them during periods of downtime. Regardless of what a base skill level you would have from the 2 attributes, it's effectively 0% skill for those types of skills.

Once you get some training in them, that's when your attributes would have an effect.

Do attributes never come into play with them?

Why should they?

I consider myself to have reasonable intelligence, and decent fine-motor-skills. Would you trust me to perform the equivalent of Iron Age surgery on you? I'm pretty sure I'll do a good job based on my attributes alone.

 

[K_Peterson]

I don't mind how OQ does Skills.

They are grouped in Skill Categories so its easy to find what you are looking for, just like RQ.

Also the base skill chances are calculated by adding two Characteristics/Attributes - I really like this idea.
Mythras does the same thing, and it feels very logical to me.
It makes the Attributes feel more meaningful - Chaosium originally did this in ElfQuest, and I've liked it since then.

I have no complaints about Skill Categories, nor the combination of attributes to form starting skill levels. What I'm complaining about is what you can spend within the Skill Categories. That's what seems goofy to me with OpenQuest.

 

[Mankcam]

I have no complaints about Skill Categories, nor the combination of attributes to form starting skill levels. What I'm complaining about is what you can spend within the Skill Categories. That's what seems goofy to me with OpenQuest.

ah yep gotcha
So too many points for beginning skills?
(A few people have mentioned things along those lines)

 

[Mankcam]

Also, with the 2 attribute total system, how are skills that can't be used untrained handled? Do attributes never come into play with them?

Most actions that a character can attempt can be made by adding two Attributes together. If you have a Skill then that value superceeds it.

For example, climbing would likely be an action attempted by rolling under STR + DEX, but if you have some training in the Athletics skill then that superceeds it.

So if the GM allows the action to be attempted, then that's the rule.

Some actions may not be attempted, such as trying to understand a lore that the character is not skilled in.
For this I could consider an INT + INT roll if I thought that the character may possibly have a chance of knowing the lore through common knowledge.
Otherwise I would simply say that it cannot be attempted (or perhaps on a roll of 01% possibly...but that's a home ruling, not an official rule).

 

[K_Peterson]

So too many points for beginning skills? (A few people have mentioned things along those lines)

I'm not sure about the starting points. I've not compared OQ to other systems to get an idea of whether its inflated or not.

I've got a pdf of OpenQuest Basic handy, and this is the breakdown of how you apply points among the Skill Categories:



This breakdown - to me - just feels weirdly arbitrary and limiting. Maybe it's because I'm so used to BRP systems that offer free skill point spends, or the allocations of points occurs in a more logical manner. It feels like you'd get pretty similar characters, and I don't like that in my BRP-play.

 

[Ossian]

How would you rank the complexity of BRP and related systems? I'm not sure where to put RQ1, RQ2, RQ3, RQG and any others I missed.

OpenQuest
Magic World
BRP Big Gold Book
Mythras

 

[Mankcam]

I'm not sure about the starting points. I've not compared OQ to other systems to get an idea of whether its inflated or not.

I've got a pdf of OpenQuest Basic handy, and this is the breakdown of how you apply points among the Skill Categories:

View attachment 27478

This breakdown - to me - just feels weirdly arbitrary and limiting. Maybe it's because I'm so used to BRP systems that offer free skill point spends, or the allocations of points occurs in a more logical manner. It feels like you'd get pretty similar characters, and I don't like that in my BRP-play.

Yeah I tend to agree that you may get similar characters to an extent.

In the full rules this is partially addressed by having three Spends builds - the one you see in OQ Basic is a Generalist, the two other ones in the full rules are Specialists, - a warrior/combatant build an academic/arcane build.

This allows for a much wider range, although it's not as granular as classic BRP

 

[Mankcam]

How would you rank the complexity of BRP and related systems? I'm not sure where to put RQ1, RQ2, RQ3, RQG and any others I missed.

OpenQuest
Magic World
BRP Big Gold Book
Mythras

Less Complex to Most Complex?

Off the top of my head, perhaps...

OQ
MW
CoC
SB
CoC 7E
RQ2/3
Mythras
RQG
RD100

(The BGB sits outside of this as it really is a collection of classic BRP rules that you use as a tool box)

It's hard to say, as RQ is about the same as Mythras, but both feel slightly cumbersome in different ways, depending upon personal taste

 

[Nick J]

I'm not sure about the starting points. I've not compared OQ to other systems to get an idea of whether its inflated or not.

I've got a pdf of OpenQuest Basic handy, and this is the breakdown of how you apply points among the Skill Categories:

View attachment 27478

This breakdown - to me - just feels weirdly arbitrary and limiting. Maybe it's because I'm so used to BRP systems that offer free skill point spends, or the allocations of points occurs in a more logical manner. It feels like you'd get pretty similar characters, and I don't like that in my BRP-play.

I guess the occupation bonuses sort of differentiate things here a bit (looking at OQ3 right now; can't remember what it was like in older iterations) but it does kind of go in backwards order from the way my brain works. My inclination is to go occupation/culture/race/whatever first, then distribute "free points" at the end.
Nevermind, just looked and indeed you get some pretty samey characters here, if you follow the 50/50/75 model outlined even with ready-made concepts with pre-allocated points. The lone exception being a Sorcerer's Apprentice who gets no skills of any sort in weapons and dumps all of those 50 into the Sorcery skill.

 

[Ronnie Sanford]

Renaissance uses OpenQuest right? Where would Aquelarre fit in there? What about the new Delta Green?

 

[ReluctantGM]

I mean, it's a pretty trivial task to use your own method of assigning skill points. I keep saying that but that's what I've done in every BRP game I've ever played in the last 30 years.

In Magic World I reduced the POW requirement for spell use to 13. I also swapped in/out a few skills depending on the campaign. If I were to run a game of Open Quest I might even steal the bit in CoC 7th where combat is basically a set of opposed skills rolls. That looks like an interesting wrinkle to add.

Aquelarre is a magnificent book. I really enjoyed reading it from cover to cover. Like Jackals it does a fantastic job of customizing OQ to fit the genre. If nothing else I recommend getting the PDF to have some fun reading.

 

[Mankcam]

Renaissance uses OpenQuest right? Where would Aquelarre fit in there? What about the new Delta Green?

Yep Raissance is a build of OQ.

I would put Delta Green about the same as Call of Cthulhu, although the game mechanics feel a bit more contemporary.

Not sure where Aquelarre would fit, as I don't have it.

 

[Nick J]

I mean, it's a pretty trivial task to use your own method of assigning skill points. I keep saying that but that's what I've done in every BRP game I've ever played in the last 30 years.

In Magic World I reduced the POW requirement for spell use to 13. I also swapped in/out a few skills depending on the campaign. If I were to run a game of Open Quest I might even steal the bit in CoC 7th where combat is basically a set of opposed skills rolls. That looks like an interesting wrinkle to add.

Aquelarre is a magnificent book. I really enjoyed reading it from cover to cover. Like Jackals it does a fantastic job of customizing OQ to fit the genre. If nothing else I recommend getting the PDF to have some fun reading.

Certainly, I house-ruled Magic World to hell and gone to make it fit the Dolmenwood campaign I've been running and it didn't break a thing. This is all just a, "What does it look like out of the box?" kind of assessment. If/when I run a game with the new version of OpenQuest I have no doubt that the way skill points are doled out will be one of the first things I tinker with, but it's nice to know that it (and most versions of BRP) are so resilient to being modded and fooled about with.

 

[Voros]

Well, besides Donald and Daisy Duck, and also Howard the Duck, I only associate the duck-people with Glorantha. It's kinda the loose gonzo bit of Glorantha that I don't use, they really were a 1970s in-joke that became Gloranthan canon (not the only bit of goofy humour that is part of Glorantha canon)
I don't think there would be a huge demand for Duck-people to be in other settings, certainly not enough to put one on the front cover. Maybe something like a Satyr or Centaur would grab more interest, but oh well, no dramas.

OQ is a good set of simple rules if anyone wants to play BRP without all the setting lore that goes with Glorantha

I dig the duck people, very 70s. Too often people take it as funny instead of weird. Think Elf Quest.

People sweat the deep setting details of Glorantha too much I just dig it for its trippy, hippy low-magic but high mythic weirdness.

I like Patrick Stuart's take on Glorantha as a very American counterculture take on fantasy.

 

[Mankcam]

I dig the duck people, very 70s. Too often people take it as funny instead of weird. Think Elf Quest.

People sweat the deep setting details of Glorantha too much I just dig it for its trippy, hippy low-magic but high mythic weirdness.

I like Patrick Stuart's take on Glorantha as a very American counterculture take on fantasy.

View attachment 27511

I don't mind the Ducks, but they jus feel too Gloranthan for me to be on the front cover of OQ - this isn't RQ

I really enjoyed that link for a review of The Gloranthan Sourcebook, I can see the Americana coming thru in the setting.
Also lots of great content in the comments section as well

Thanks for posting!

 

[3rik]

Yep Raissance is a build of OQ.

I like Renaissance, but I've never done a thorough comparison with OpenQuest. What are the main differences?

 

[Newt Newport]

I don't mind the Ducks, but they jus feel too Gloranthan for me to be on the front cover of OQ - this isn't RQ

To be 100% clear OQ is not RQ, or Gloranthan, and hasn't been from the moment the 1st version dropped. While you can play Glorantha in it, with a bit of tweaking here and there (depending on which era of Gloranthan Gaming you are emulating), it's never had any Gloranthan IP in it.

I get the whole "Ducks=Gloranthan race", but its also one that more than anything in Glorantha has been taken forward by fans and made their own. OQ is a bit like that ;)

As for why ducks are on the cover

Why is a Duck on the cover of OpenQuest 3?

1. As a nod towards the games' inspiration.
2. There's precedent. Ducks have been in every edition, as generic non-Gloranthan Ducks, and there was a duck on 1st Edition cover that went on to be the cover for OQ Basics.
3. I prefer Ducks to Halflings Also as mentioned elsewhere, for people not familiar with Glorantha, anthropomorphic Ducks have a wide cultural reference point thanks to Disney.
4. As a way of saying, "Hey, this Fantasy Game is a little bit different, we are not in D&Dland anymore".
5. Because it's fun.

Talking of fun, the Duck Crusade is a bit of fun in a fanzine format (and fully funded on Kickstarter). The upcoming Book of Duck (working title) is fun which will show readers how to detail a non-human race or culture in OQ terms. I could have chosen Dwarfs or Elves, but that would have been predictable and with my writing publishing/schedule for OQ this year it would have been a bit heavy going. Oh look here's the cover

For balance, I've posted the rest of the upcoming OpenQuest supplement covers on openquestrpg.com.

 

[Mankcam]

To be 100% clear OQ is not RQ, or Gloranthan, and hasn't been from the moment the 1st version dropped. While you can play Glorantha in it, with a bit of tweaking here and there (depending on which era of Gloranthan Gaming you are emulating), it's never had any Gloranthan IP in it.

I get the whole "Ducks=Gloranthan race", but its also one that more than anything in Glorantha has been taken forward by fans and made their own. OQ is a bit like that ;)

As for why ducks are on the cover

Why is a Duck on the cover of OpenQuest 3?

1. As a nod towards the games' inspiration.
2. There's precedent. Ducks have been in every edition, as generic non-Gloranthan Ducks, and there was a duck on 1st Edition cover that went on to be the cover for OQ Basics.
3. I prefer Ducks to Halflings Also as mentioned elsewhere, for people not familiar with Glorantha, anthropomorphic Ducks have a wide cultural reference point thanks to Disney.
4. As a way of saying, "Hey, this Fantasy Game is a little bit different, we are not in D&Dland anymore".
5. Because it's fun.

Talking of fun, the Duck Crusade is a bit of fun in a fanzine format (and fully funded on Kickstarter). The upcoming Book of Duck (working title) is fun which will show readers how to detail a non-human race or culture in OQ terms. I could have chosen Dwarfs or Elves, but that would have been predictable and with my writing publishing/schedule for OQ this year it would have been a bit heavy going. Oh look here's the cover

For balance, I've posted the rest of the upcoming OpenQuest supplement covers on openquestrpg.com.

Well it's odd that my line about Ducks has got so much airplay, when the main gist of what I was saying was promoting OQ in a positive light, esp given that I'm a pretty enthusiastic supporter of OQ.

I actually didn't think that anthromorphic Ducks were such a big thing, but this thread has revealed a legion of Duck supporters, heh heh

It's weird that I dig this and don't at the same time

But you definately answered the question "Why is there a Duck on the OpenQuest cover?"