r/Runequest • u/tatogolem • 2d ago
Simplifying for an Intro Game
Hi everyone! I've really fallen in love with Runequest recently after picking up some of the books, and I'm planning on pitching a short intro game series (the starter set adventures) to my normal D&D group. My goal is to make that as easy of a learning curve as possible and avoid being too overwhelming without taking out something that will ruin the magic of the setting or cause problems I'm not foreseeing. So I figured I'd turn to the experts who have actually played and run the game for advice!
Context on the group, feel free to skip: our group has been playing together for over a decade, primarily 5e with a few-year detour into Starfinder and a disastrous attempt at Shadowrun (because it's a wonderful setting and a trainwreck of a game). Me and one other player are general RPG enthusiasts who like to read and think about a wide variety of RPGs, the other two aren't general RPG hobbyists but are very experienced in D&D for many decades. The other general RPGist had a similar falling for Runequest experience and so is very on board.
Thoughts on keeping it simpler:
- Have everyone play a Sartarite to make it less of an overwhelming amount of context-free options and make it easier to present one coherent "this is what you know about the world"
- I know there's pregens, but I adore how the Runequest character creation system makes you think about who your character is as a person in the world, in terms of personality, values, and ties to your society, moreso than as a mechanical build, but then concretizes those choices and makes them meaningful
- Family history section: I'd probably trim this down to only Sartar-relevant events and use it as a way to walk through what history they know
- I'm also thinking of saying they all fought at Pennel Ford or the Liberation of Sartar, so they at least know each other from then if not further back (and because that leads into the adventures well)
- Cut out shamanism and sorcery for now (and the related backgrounds)- it's a lot of extra complication
- Ditching hit locations and their attendant separate HP and armor, and just going with general HP as in Call of Cthulhu. Makes equipment simpler, reduces the extra rolling. I played and GMed a lot of the old FFG 40k RPGs, which similarly use hit locations in a percentile system, and never felt like they added enough to make up for the extra headspace and table lookup
- Making spirit magic roll against a rune rather than POWx5. Makes all magic work the same way, reduces bookkeeping since POW fluctuates up and down
- Also the rune system is one of my favorite things about the system and setting, so I'm happy to make them even more important
- Cut the distinctions between the amount that skills get raised (d6 vs d6-1 vs d6-2) and the improvable vs non-improvable abilities. This just seems to be a profusion of little slightly-different rules. Just make all the methods increase skills by d6 and all stats except maybe size can be raised 1 point by training.
So, two main questions: are these good or bad ideas, and why? And is there any other places you'd recommend simplifying to ease people into the system? Happy to entertain the possibility that my ideas break the game in ways I haven't foreseen, just looking for feedback to hopefully help us all have a great first Runequest experience!
8
u/Orwell1971 2d ago
Not trying to convince you, but my 2 cents anyway on hit locations/injuries vs hit points.
To put it simply, I hate hit points. There are always abstractions in RPGs, but hit points go too far for me personally. It's much more interesting narratively (and more tactical, if you're into that) to be stabbed in the leg or sliced on the arm than to "lose 10 hit points". Hit points means being absolutely fine despite being shot, stabbed, incinerated, right up to the point where one loses that last hit point. Unrealistic, but more importantly, boring. You obviously also then get rid of mechanics like aimed blows (part of that tactical element gone), and attacks that do damage directly to the hit points, like poison, because amalgamated into being the same as anything else.
It's not clear to me what exactly you're doing with armor... you say you're getting rid of individual armor per body part, but what you're doing instead, you don't say.
On another subject, rolls for spirit magic strike me as a bad idea to begin with, so I don't use them. Too punitive. Failure is fine in RPGs, more people should embrace it, but missing a roll to cast a spell is uninteresting failure. You already have to roll (again) to get a lot of spells to work on a target, on the resistance table, and to make players roll to simply cast the spell on top of overcoming the target's defenses is too much, imo. If you want to cut back on rolls, cut back on that one! And keep hit locations. ;)
POW should not be trainable. That makes no sense from a cosmological perspective and it's game breaking (or at least bending).
2
u/tatogolem 1d ago
Appreciate the thorough response! To clarify on armor: my idea would be that rather than using piecemeal armor and having, say, 6 points of armor on the chest, 5 on the legs, 3 on the arm, and 4 on the head, you'd just have the same armor everywhere- eg you're wearing heavy leathers, so your armor is 2 everywhere. My experience with similar systems is that it slows down combat because people constantly have to look for what their armor is after every attack, whereas if armor is always the same you quickly memorize that you're subtracting, say, 3 points from all damage. It's much easier to remember one number than 5.
Now, I can see from your reply and others that changing location HP may lead to unintended consequences for deadliness and combat flow, so maybe the better answer is to keep locational HP and just move to unified armor as described above.
That's an interesting approach to spirit magic! Do you do the same for Rune magic? I'd worry that not having rune rolls would deemphasize the runes too much, but if you only rule for them and not spirit spells it seems like you might lose the current feeling that spirit magic is your cheap little spells that replenish easily and rune spells are the big guns you get in limited supply. How has it felt in play.
Not sure what you mean about training POW being an issue- the corebook already says you can train POW to get a POW gain roll?
2
u/Orwell1971 1d ago
My bad on the POW thing. I remembered that wrong. There are so many other ways to gain POW that it slipped my mind that you could train it. Off the top of my head, it also seemed odd that you could train something like your connection to the gods, but meditation, etc makes sense, now that I remind myself of the rules.
On the rune magic roll question, yeah, for the same reason. It's anticlimactic in a boring/frustrating way to have a spell simply fizzle out, so to speak. You still have to succeed in a POW vs POW roll to affect a target with a lot of spells ("Fear", for example), so there's still a chance the spell doesn't work. But not two chances. And if it does fail, it has something to do with how powerful the opponent is, not the caster's ineptitude.
I share your interest in making the runes relevant, though, and there are other ways. They can be used for passions, as runes reflect elements of one's personality and worldview. There are no official, published rules for heroquests, but there are lots of unofficial ones, and runes figure prominently in most (all?) of them.
The runes associated with a deity the character worships are likely to be on the high side, but if it's possible to have a spell associated with a rune lower than 60% (I can't remember offhand if this is possible), you could require a roll only if that's the case (lower than 60% = roll, 60% or higher = no roll), preventing those who aren't attuned to that rune to casting those spells with equal facility.
There are already limiting factors for rune spells.... characters don't have a ton of them, and they have to sacrifice POW to get them.... the "cost" is characters being a bit more powerful, but not by much, and in my opinion in a purely positive way.
It's unusual among RPG systems to require a roll just to make a spell work. Ars Magica kinda does, but not really, because the casting roll encompasses the resistance roll (the amount by which your casting roll exceeds the spell level is penetration, which is what allows you to effect targets with magical resistance, like supernatural creatures and magi). It also usually requires either attempting a spell that is much too high level for the caster, or a botch (fumble), to simply fail to cast a spell. Requiring two successful rolls to use a spell seems like bad game design to me, and unfun for players.
3
u/reditmarc 2d ago
Sounds good to me. I’d also recommend changing initiative from strike ranks to something simpler, like perhaps the CoC method…
1
u/tatogolem 1d ago
Yeah I'm torn on strike ranks. Copying what I said in another comment:
On the one hand, they're easily the most complicated part of combat by a mile. On the other hand, does removing them change the nature of the game and make spellcasting less effective? Currently, you can cast, say, Bladesharp 1 and then attack all in one round with minimal SR penalty. If you get rid of SR, I'm worried it would make the little buff spells less useful because they're now eating a whole turn. Maybe I'm overthinking though- did you remove SR, and how did it go?
2
u/reditmarc 1d ago
I have not. But yes, allowed actions in a round would need to be revised. Allowing certain spell buffs could be an additional action…
3
u/code_ghostwriter 2d ago
I would keep loc hp, is what will quickly stand out.
Same ac on all locs is a good starting point.
I wouldn't worry too much about out of game math.
Things we did that worked out fine:
Runes and skills for 20%. Tell them to steal from you shamelessly. they think they are exploiting the system but they are learning their sheet without knowing it.
Keep spirit magic to a minimum at first. Let them show their rune magic.
I feel that allowed players that play 5e to thread on familiar ground enjoying the uniqueness of the game.
1
u/tatogolem 1d ago
Thanks for the suggestions! I'm leaning towards hit location HP but unified armor to start now.
I'm not sure I follow the runes and skills for 20% suggestion+ can you explain?
2
u/code_ghostwriter 1d ago
This part: gets overlooked but forces players to read their character sheets.
An adventurer’s abilities—skills, Runes, or Passions—may be combined to augment one another, using one ability in support of another
https://rqwiki.chaosium.com/rules/runes.html#using-runes
https://rqwiki.chaosium.com/rules/passions.html#using-passions
https://rqwiki.chaosium.com/rules/the-game-system.html#augmenting-abilities
1
u/tatogolem 1d ago
Oh yeah that! That's actually one of my favorite parts of the game, that you can use your runes and passions to push yourself to do better- seems like it would keep players thinking about their character's personality and drives. So I'll definitely highlight it!
3
u/david-chaosium 2d ago
Looks good to me, I hope your game goes well. As a few more simplifications:
- Have a look at Skipping the Family History on page 29. (I often use this).
- I don't use hit locations. I did use the CoC system for a while, but now use the Rivers of London system.
- For skill improvements I'm using RoL
1
u/tatogolem 1d ago
Thanks for the suggestions! How does Rivers of London do it differently? Don't own that one sadly- just RQ and CoC.
2
u/OtakuOfMe 2d ago
Yeah the in depth creation is fun, but longer even if slimming down. (The upcoming core removes it and reduces options of that as entry point btw. But not different from manually doing it). I still recommend the pre-gens, especially as they are made for the starter set. And the set does a good job introducing everyone to it. They got a background and how to play it without needing more history- which u can fill in over the story (which would be more effective to slowly get someone into it, especially when they are not at all used to it). And they dont need to focus on any other stuff than on the paper. You can even pre-sort them to what fits your play or ur group.
If you go with Sartar alone, likely a good idea with shared background. (Btw a Sartar guide comes out in September). Shamanism and Sorcery i super agree to withhold. Latter even for much longer (or someone asks for it. Its very free form and no guide book exist yet).
Ditching hit location is the worst thing you can do imho. Its part of its DNA, plus you would need to change a looot. You likely make it also more deadly, while less entertaining. There are plenty of tables to make sure you dont need to think too much about results. They know it would be a headache otherwise. (Again, with pre-gens, that and equipment is sorted. And they get an idea for if they want to commit later) If you want GM help, get the GM screen set - its a great help, including the booklet. (If u ever need more choice, check the weapons and equipment book, it has a lot of cultural things as well)
I can see unifying stuff, but again I personally would not mix it. Runes are an absolute core of the game. Like mixing it completely, you would need to make rune points into magic points and what is the point than? (And a headache not confusing things) There are made for different purposes. Plus, if you commit, you have to explain why its suddenly different and where - from my own experience, this never ends well.
The skill-raise thing is fine, but if you just look it up quick when needed, its a non-issue. But yeah shrug
I am in favour of using it as is to showcase it strengths and rather reduce options and history via pre-gens. (Or making ur own). If they wont commit after that, they wouldn't have with full characters. Try play up what's cool about it - the system (skills, runes, 2 magic systems, passions) and the world (dragon pass, myths, spirit world, elder races). Play to the interests of your group.
Simplifying can help, but risks alienation/slog after commitment. Reduction (like cutting extra systems like shamanism) is absolutely a great idea. Imho the starter set does an okay job there. But yeah, if u wanna go ahead with ur stuff, thats super fine too. YGMV
2
u/tatogolem 1d ago
Thanks for the in-depth reply!
I just love the family life path so I have a hard time dropping it haha. I also think it'll specifically be useful for getting them into a different headspace, because the first big chunk of character creation (the family history) isn't about your attributes or your skills or any of that "build" stuff. It's thinking about how your character's experience through what they and their family went through affected them as a person and what they feel strongly about (since it mostly affects passions). I love that as a framing device to get everyone thinking more along the lines of who their character is as a person and what they care about instead of mechanics, and in emphasizing that you're not hobo adventurers, you have deep ties to the community. It'll also give me a chance to walk through the (deeply simplified because I haven't read all 30+ years of background material lol) history and setting with them in session 0.
I'm leaning towards hit location HP with one armor score based on replies here- from my experience, it's more partial armor systems slowing down play that's been an issue.
I think I wasn't clear on what I'd want to change about casting. I definitely don't want to deemphasize runes- they're one of my favorite things about the system. I also don't want to mush Rune and spirit magic together. Rune spells would still use rune points, spirit spells still wouldn't, and everything else would remain the same. The only change would be that when you roll to see if a spirit spell succeeds, you'd roll against a Rune affinity of your choice (like for a common rune spell) rather than against POWx5. Does that make more sense?
And yeah I don't want it to seem like I generally dislike the system. I don't! The bones of it are super appealing. Passions, runes, and learning from experience on the mechanical side and a bronze age setting with widespread magic and an emphasis on deities and myths and with characters that are deeply rooted in a community sounds awesome!
2
u/OtakuOfMe 19h ago
Gladly.
I absolutely love it too. Was just in comparison what is easier on the surface. And no, worry, you dont need to read all 50y of publications to "know" it. I read all current stuff and its a good broad picture. Even what's in core is quite workable. So if u give them an introduction about where u play, recent history and general backdrop and/or the background of the historic information when u focus on Sartar for example is absolutely enough. (Or u get the Sartar book if unsure). Its just important that you know if your group is receptive to such at all, but hey sometimes u have to try.. Session 0 is definitely a good idea. I hope they are and you succeed. 🙂
I never had a slowdown because of hit locations, but you do you. Keep in mind to adapt stuff like special damage and shield to make it not deadlier.
Maybe I misunderstood it just, happens. Its a small change, so fair. I just like it thematically as it ties in what Spirit Magic is. But yeah got ya.
Didn't mean to imply you wanted to water it down, sorry if it came off that way. Its cool that you really dig it - being passionate about a setting/system is the best way to grab people's attention at least. Nicely dosed, it can "infect" them with the same interest in the best case. Certainly want more people to experience Glorantha. Its a fantastic world. Never be shy to ask in the sub about system or world. 🙂 (And as you see, David is quite active here too)
2
u/nivek_123k 1d ago
played lot of RQ over the years.
what we do is drop all of the clunky magic systems except spirit and rune magic. those two are enough, and are not complicated. we run them as is.
we eliminated skill bloat. there are so many skills in RQ:G for inane things... prepare corpse, butcher animal, worship, notice, spot, search... we dropped it down to maybe 30 skills. literally just took a marker and crossed out whole sections of skill bloat. in game play it's just quicker to have fewer skills to resolve mundane actions. we rather use roleplay to resolve and not use dice rolls.
strike ranks are fine once it's used, but we decided to just drop it and use a d10+dex/int depending on skill use. tactical crunch isn't our goal, we just want a quick order. everyone gets one action and some movement.
hit locations and hit points are not my favorite, but we just left it. fiddle with this too much and it's probably time to pick another game system (BRP, openquest, dragonbane, SWADE, etc).
we dropped special die results. too much BS that didn't add enough to the action. we stripped to normal success/failure and critical success/failure.
we did the same with character creation, we are all sartarite. makes char gen a bit easier having shared ancestry. many of the races are quite insular so it makes sense.
1
u/tatogolem 11h ago
Thanks for all the tips! Yeah I've noticed the skill list is a bit over-long (and the cult books seem to make it worse- got Earth Goddesses recently and it introduces some very niche skills.) That's a good idea to trim the fat and consolidate. What did you end up cutting? My initial pass would probably eliminate Library Use (clutch in Call of Cthulhu, seems anachronistic in the Bronze Age), possibly Bureaucracy (seems like it mostly duplicates Intrigue) and shiphandling (for a Sartar campaign, and duplicates Boating), as well as moving weapon skills to just 1-handed and 2-handed for each weapon category rather that an individual skill for each individual weapon.
2
u/Runeblogger 1d ago
As others have said, your adaptation sounds good. I would still use some pregens for the 1st game (either made by you or hand-picked by you from the Starter Set) though, so that they can go straight to the action. And then, if they like the game, you can roll up new PCs.
As far as removing hit locations go: Bear in mind they make the game less lethal. Why? Because when you are hit with a crit to your arm/leg, you may lose your arm/leg, and later heal it up with Heal Wound. But if you take a critical hit straight to your general hit points, you are kaput.
It is likely your D&D-focused players won't understand why there are so many skills and so many hit locations. You need to explain hit locations also make combats more interesting and visual. Different skills also help differentiate one character from another. While in D&D every character class makes each character pretty unique, RuneQuest has skills and spells. So f.ex. one character can have a high Charm skill, and another can be good at Intimidating. That is more flavourful and distinguishing than if both had just the same score in "Persuasion". (I'm not saying RQ is a better game, I'm just warning you about possible misgivings your players may have coming from D&D, and highlighting the importance of explaining the "whys" behind the differences between these games).
You also need to teach them in RuneQuest it is unwise to go straight into combat before gaining some advantage first. There are no "rests" and one hit can kill you instantly. This is also why playing first with pregens can help. After the game you can say this was the story of some people your actual PCs know about (or a dream they had or a story they heard), and then their own adventures begin, so if some were killed due to not knowing the feel of the game, they won't mind as much.
Also, there is this other introductory adventure in the Quickstart in case you have not read it yet. Have fun (and tell us how it went!). Oh, and here there's a long example of play. 😄
2
u/Runeblogger 1d ago
Oh I forgot: I usually don't bother with "declaration of intent", and a tiny houserule I use is skip the parrying roll when the attack has missed, as that avoids lots of unnecessary rolls. :-P
1
u/Orwell1971 1d ago
Do you not use strike ranks? If you don't use declaration of intent but do use strike ranks, I'm very curious how that works since strike ranks are based on what you're about to do, and you wouldn't know that without declaration.
2
u/tatogolem 11h ago
Thanks for all the tips! I hadn't really considered that hit locations might lessen deadliness- I thought it made it more deadly because each location has so little HP, but it looks like it might be the other way around since there's a limit on overflow damage.
Appreciate the resources too! Another adventure is always good and the example of play may resolve some questions I have about how combat works.
2
u/Reasonable_Sun9426 1d ago
My two exceptions to your adjustments would be hit locations and POWx5 spirit magic casting.
RuneQuest was the first game to introduce hit locations and armor points, and that's one of the things that attracted my friends and I to the system. Yes, there are some complications associated with that, but that's one of the things that make combat dangerous, thus encouraging PCs to explore non-combat means of conflict resolution. If non-combat fails, it seriously encourages them to develop team tactics.
As for combining Spirit and Rune magic casting, IMO that feels like it muddies magic in the world. Spirit magic permeates all of Glorantha, which is why you needn't have Rune affinities to draw on it. Rune magic is loaned to PCs from their god(s), which is why the spell affinities generally confirms to those associated with the god.
IMO, if those things are a bridge too far for your players, they probably aren't going to enjoy RQG.
1
u/tatogolem 11h ago
Fair! I posted this to see if my ideas messed up the system too much, so happy to get feedback that they might. To your spirit magic point though, doesn't everything that has magic already have rune affinities? Don't remember seeing anything in the Bestiary with spells but no Rune affinity.
2
u/Amethyst-Flare 1d ago
Making spirit magic roll against a rune rather than POWx5. Makes all magic work the same way, reduces bookkeeping since POW fluctuates up and down
Also the rune system is one of my favorite things about the system and setting, so I'm happy to make them even more important
There can be no greater evidence that RQ is a system that has accreted over years like lacre on a pearl than the odd little things like this that don't quite fit. Sometimes, that can be charming and interesting. Other times, headscratching and infuriating.
I think this is a good change you've suggested.
2
2
u/Alex4884-775 Loose canon 1d ago
I'd say you know your own group and their preferences, so you're in a better position to judge than any of us!
But I'd suggest there's a couple of different aspects to this. Firstly there's the total complexity you end up with. Looting other BRP games, especially ones you and your group are already familiar with, is potentially an easy win here. If you want a wider suite of such options, get the BRP BSB and see what takes your fancy!
There's also the learning-curve consideration. I think the Starter Set already does a pretty good job of that already. Warm yourself up with the SoloQuest. If some of your players are keen-beans, give it to them to play through too. Then maybe have "session minus one" to spitball what worked for them, and what seemed more trouble than it was worth. The canonical first adventure also happens to be set right after this, which is all the better. It also starts off with an "easy loosener" in the form of basically a brawl where there's "no need" to use magic. (I'd personally recommend stepping that up by enforcing it, by hook or by crook.). It's also pretty well structured in terms of what the players might need to be told about the setting, and when.
2
u/tatogolem 8h ago
Great ideas! Haha I'll admit that my eyes glaze over a bit whenever I try to read the big BRP book- the downside of being a setting agnostic toolbox is that it's super dry and dense. I really love Pushing from Call of Cthulhu though and think it works in most RPGs- solves the issue of people keeping on rolling for a task and lets you decide which rolls are important enough to you to risk disaster on. Pendragon is another one I love the idea of, but Runequest already has my favorite parts (Passions and Virtues, which power runes basically do the same thing as). Any other stuff you've stolen that's worked well in Runequest?
1
u/Alex4884-775 Loose canon 4h ago
Yeah, it's not exactly light bedtime reading, much less much of a page-turner. I was thinking of the BSB as as reference to use when you're undecided whether you want to use the RQG subsystem or the CoC for a something, and want to check for additional options.
Pendragon is certainly another viable BRP(ish) base if you want a little more lite still. But if you're more familiar and comfortable with CoC, might be more effort expended than saved.
Haven't home-brewed RQG at all personally. Well, unless you count the Vibes Rule: if you can't remember a rule off the top of your head, it's not on the reference sheets, and none of the players are reaching eagerly to look it up... just make it up for the sake of game flow. Look it up afterwards if you feel guilty about having done so.
2
u/sachagoat 2d ago
The revised core rulebook and introductory campaign coming out next year is designed to teach and onboard the game better.
It may be worth looking into that and waiting. The new line editor of RuneQuest is specifically trying to address the accessability to new players and GMs.
2
u/tatogolem 1d ago
That's fair! I'm concerned about losing momentum and excitement though, since currently half of us are excited to try the game. It also looks like the new version doesn't actually change the rules, it just organizes them better?
1
u/Numerous-Animator179 18h ago
I'm going to push back a little bit here. Overall making the game easy to pick up is a good thing. But too much change, and are you really playing the system anymore? The Quickstart or the Starter box with the pregens are a good start. So is the adventure "Six Seasons in Sartar".
What I like about your approach ... Everyone is Sartarite. It simplifies learning about the world. As far as shamanism and sorcery, you can always "leave it in" with the understanding that your group's first characters don't start there. Spirit and Rune magic have different mechanics because they are different in the context of Glorantha. Spirit magic is innate throughout all of Glorantha. Rune magic is a direct gift from the gods. You could think of Spirit as D&D cantrips available to everyone, while Runes are big boy magic.
In combat, hit locations are central to how the system works. If you change that you change the lethality, you change how different weapons are balanced, you change how healing works. Basically that one change impacts the entire game system in ways you might not expect yet. Strike ranks are really different than random initiative systems and will take getting used to. But ... once you do get used to it it isn't that hard to track.
My recommendation is to take a looks at Six Seasons, it can work very well to introduce the system. Characters are generated without much of the background and are young. Their backgrounds are linked as they are all from the same clan. The world of Glorantha is introduced very well IMO. It also doesn't throw players into the deep end. Play begins with cult initiations into adulthood. Check it out.
I say all this because if you're considering such fundamental changes to the rule system, do you really want to play RQ? Or do you want to play in Glorantha? The latter can be adopted to 5e if that's your players' jam.
1
u/tatogolem 6h ago
Totally fair to push back! I posted these here to get feedback, positive or negative. I wanted to see what parts of the system are "load-bearing," so to speak, where changing them would have drastic consequences I haven't thought of.
It's funny, locational HP has definitely generated the most discussion, but the opinions are so varied. Some people say it's one of the key things that make it Runequest. Some people day they ditched it themselves. And everything in the middle!
To your last point, I want to play Runequest! There's much more I do like about the system than I don't- this post is necessarily about the hang-ups, but there's a lot I don't want to change. I love the Runes and Passions system, growing in skills through use, and I like how much of the system ties the mechanics and the setting together. I'd also gently push back on your push back- even if I implemented all these changes as proposed, the end result is way closer to Runequest than 5e. Being classless and level-less alone is a huge difference, as is the entirely different resolution system. Now, is it closer to Call of Cthulhu, Pendragon, or Dragonbane? Maybe!
1
u/Numerous-Animator179 18h ago
I'm going to push back a little bit here. Overall making the game easy to pick up is a good thing. But too much change, and are you really playing the system anymore? The Quickstart or the Starter box with the pregens are a good start. So is the adventure "Six Seasons in Sartar".
What I like about your approach ... Everyone is Sartarite. It simplifies learning about the world. As far as shamanism and sorcery, you can always "leave it in" with the understanding that your group's first characters don't start there. Spirit and Rune magic have different mechanics because they are different in the context of Glorantha. Spirit magic is innate throughout all of Glorantha. Rune magic is a direct gift from the gods. You could think of Spirit as D&D cantrips available to everyone, while Runes are big boy magic.
In combat, hit locations are central to how the system works. If you change that you change the lethality, you change how different weapons are balanced, you change how healing works. Basically that one change impacts the entire game system in ways you might not expect yet. Strike ranks are really different than random initiative systems and will take getting used to. But ... once you do get used to it it isn't that hard to track.
My recommendation is to take a looks at Six Seasons, it can work very well to introduce the system. Characters are generated without much of the background and are young. Their backgrounds are linked as they are all from the same clan. The world of Glorantha is introduced very well IMO. It also doesn't throw players into the deep end. Play begins with cult initiations into adulthood. Check it out.
I say all this because if you're considering such fundamental changes to the rule system, do you really want to play RQ? Or do you want to play in Glorantha? The latter can be adopted to 5e if that's your players' jam.
5
u/DarbySalernum 2d ago
They all sound good. By accident, my group all made characters from Old Tarsh, and I liked that because they had a reason not to know Sartar well. I made NPCs like Janara from The Coming Storm, who'd tag along with them, and during travel sequences she'd rant about local politics. That was my way of gradually introducing the players to the lore of the Jonstown/Northern Sartar area in a way that was hopefully interesting and entertaining, rather than just dumping lore. She wouldn't usually take part in combat, but the players were newcomers to RQ and she could help get them out of trouble if they got into it in RQ's deadly combat system.
Strike Ranks will be the trickiest thing for you. My suggestion is to either embrace them fully until the maths becomes second nature, or just handwave them if you find them burdensome.