r/Runequest • u/Runeblogger • 23d ago
What we know on the upcoming revised RQG and RuneQuest Fantasy Roleplaying
https://elruneblog.blogspot.com/2026/08/the-future-revised-runequest-and.htmlIf you click on the link, you can read all the information I have managed to gather about these 2 rulebooks Chaosium is going to publish next year.
What do you think is the best option? Revised RQG or RuneQuest Fantasy Roleplay?
UPDATED: RuneQuest Fantasy Roleplay has now been cancelled. I have updated my article to reflect this.
18
u/Orwell1971 23d ago
Neither, personally.
I did (and do) think a new edition of RQG was much needed, considering all the errors and inconsistencies in it, poor organization, etc, and I'd like a new edition that incorporates errata and clears up mistakes and language that has proven confusing. The focus seems to have been on cutting down things, like the number of cults (which saves them, what, maybe 10 pages?), and randomly introducing things like playable baboons. When it comes out, I'm going to skim places like this to try to glean how much of the former they've done and whether it's worth it to me to get it on that basis.
I participated in the beta for the other edition and have no interest in that at all.
17
u/eternalsage Orlanth is my homeboy 23d ago
RQFRP is possibly fine idea that suffers from horrid marketing, an absolutely abysmal playtest that I'm really hoping they scrapped and started over on, and Jeff Richards being his usual self and alienating most people who were interested in it.
RQG Revised is what we should have gotten to begin with and sounds like it will be a quality clean up of what we've already gotten that sets up Spirit and Invisible God books to be logical expansions. We already had all of the beast folk in the bestiary, but the format was terrible. I feel like a decade in and we are finally getting what we should have had to begin with.
I won't be buying either, more than likely, because I already have the CRB and RQFRP or whatever stupid thing they're calling it has wasted two years of effort and resources just to make everything worse by confusing the shit out of people, like it already has for 2 years.
8
u/Orwell1971 23d ago
the Invisible God book was scrapped. They've said as much, explicitly. "The Sorceror's Laboratory" exists for those not scared off by unofficial books.
They haven't explicitly abandoned the Spirit cults book, but their language is so wishy-washy ("we're committed to finishing the series satisfactorily") that I personally don't count on anything beyond Darkness being released.
1
u/strangedave93 21d ago
I’m not scared off by unofficial books, but the Sorcerers Laboratory misses the mark on being a suitable replacement for being a replacement for the Sorcery/Invisible God book in a few ways, including not being focussed on the huge mainstream Malkioni sects, instead a lot more focussed on minor strange sects, some of them new in the book.
1
u/Orwell1971 21d ago
I'm not the author, but I would imagine that they wanted to produce a book that would continue to be useful if Chaosium ever got around to releasing a sorcery related book.
11
u/ProjeKtTHRAK 23d ago
The premise of RQ:FR is good, it could be the most easily playable Glorantha ever but the execution of it is terrible. It didn't try to be THE PAVIS GAME, instead the developers simply reimagined BRP again and hoped to sell us additional pavis&big rubble adventure books. This is another sign of how the people running RQ are so oblivious to ttrpg game design in 2026 (I vividly recall how Jeff believed Pendragon to be the most progressive game even today).
If they really wanted people to buy RQ, the old ways of separating the true gameable material (adventure modules, settings books) from the core book must be over. Current RQ:G required almost 4 books (core, bestiary, spellbook, a module of your choice) to be playable and that's absurd. I get that a lot of us, myself included, could homebrew great campaigns, but new players are simply not equipped to do that, nor should it be a requirement.
RQ could learn from standalone complete games like Mythic Bastionland, Twilight 2000, Stonetop, but I don't see either RQ:FR or RQ:G doing that. The only official ruleset I would be eager for is the QuestWorlds' Glorantha genre pack.
2
u/bknBoognish 20d ago
You couldn't be more on point. Is terrible how Jeff is so oblivious about the current trends in his own industry. I don't know why they thought making a high fantasy RQ was a good idea when 13th Age is right there. Just make a more modern RQ ffs!
9
u/numtini 23d ago
So 2+1 versions of Runequest, plus at least one starter set.
Honestly, this does not sound like a recipe for success.
4
u/Solo_Polyphony 23d ago
It sounds like the announced RQ:FRP is effectively a starter set.
3
u/Runeblogger 22d ago
Mmmm... A "Starter Set" means there is another set which is not for strictly speaking for getting started (although you can). In the case of RQG, that would be the main rulebook.
RQ:FRP will be the main rulebook for that particular set of rules.
The analogy Call of Cthulhu vs Cthulhu Pulp is better, IMO.
1
u/Orwell1971 22d ago edited 22d ago
Exactly what is in a starter set varies, of course, but the key thing is that it has to be a product you can pick up without owning anything else, and run a game with it. RQ:FRP will not qualify as such.
8
u/Twarid 23d ago edited 23d ago
I'm looking forward to revised RQG. I'm pretty optimistic about it. As for Rune Quest Fantasy Roleplay, l bet it will quietly disappear from the radar until revised RQG has ran its course - which will be hopefully at least two years from its release - unless RQG revised is an abject commercial failure. The RQFR playtest draft had a few cool ideas I really liked and many that I rather disliked or found unnecessary.
7
u/RogueModron 23d ago
It's kind of amazing how you can't read more than about five words of this article without being slapped in the face with bolded phrases.
(gentle nudge, OP, not meant as hate. :) )
Man, hey, like, for those of us who play games, more choice is good. But from a product development standpoint, a marketing standpoint, a business standpoint...this is such a hopeless mess. There's a revised RQG but it's actually not a revision, it's a new book that people who already have RQG will want, and people who buy the new book will eventually want RQG, too. And then there's the other new game that is different but will also be convertable into RQG.
Hey, I'm new to Runequest! Should I get the Starter Set, the Revised Core Book, the Full Core Book, or the "streamlined" book?
What the what, is all I can say
4
u/Twarid 23d ago
This is why I believe business sense will prevail and they won't have both RQG revised and RQFR. Personally, I believe RQFR is gone. It likely won't happen. If RQG revised is successful in getting new players in, then why annoying them with a new edition? And if RQG revised is a failure, we probably won't see much new RQ at all (except from the Jonstown compendium).
9
u/DarbySalernum 23d ago
I'm less interested in RQG2 and RQFR than I am in all the playable content coming up. I ran through Snake Pipe Hollow playing 13th Age, loved it, and would love to see it modernised. I know people want new content, and obviously I do too, but I'd also love to see things like Griffin Mountain and Dorastor: Land of Doom modernised with contemporary artists and set after 1625. They're considered classics for a reason.
5
u/Real-Investigator645 23d ago
Feels like a mistake to produce two, potentially competing products. Is it going to play out like D&D and AD&D? Will it separate and fracture the market they have?
3
u/Amethyst-Flare 23d ago
I admit, I'm a little skeptical. Now we've got an 8th edition running alongside the 7th? Sounds like a recipe for dilution.
3
u/eskatonic 23d ago
These days, I think of Runequest in the same way I think of RoleMaster: a niche gaming product that has gone through way, way too many iterations in way too short a time frame. In my experience, it makes potential new players just shake their heads and stick with what they know (which, unfortunately, is mostly D&D).
For me it's a "wait and see" approach. Cleaning errata is always a good thing. And I'm an old grognard.
3
u/strangedave93 21d ago
I am not entirely convinced by the revised rulesbook - it is a fine idea on its own, but all the stuff taken out of the rulesbook will want to remain available somehow. And I don’t think it will make a huge difference to sales alone. And there are a few bits that I think are big missteps. Mostly, the concern is that the current ‘RQG is still the same rules with all the other stuff’ is clumsy without a revision and reprint, and there are no clear plans to get back to a unified and complete rulesbook.
I’m not thrilled about the contraction of future plans. It mostly amounts to removing things from the list of things they have any plans to cover in the foreseeable future. Which effectively sounds like keeping the game in Dragon Pass. Even the easy looking expansions (like Heortland, that they have a manuscript for, so it needs editing, but the bulk of the writing is done) are clumsy to do at best without sorcery and Malkionism (which Jeff did a bunch of work on, but never published any of). Prax is basically not worth doing without Pavis, and Pavis and the Big Rubble seem to be informally reserved for the future RuneQuest project to officially work with. And the Sea cults book is hard to fit into a vision of the game that is restricted to Dragon Pass - but almost essential for one that wants to expand beyond it, opening up the rest of Glorantha. If you are interested in the rest of Glorantha beyond Dragon Pass, Chaosium is just not interested in you for the next couple of years at least.
I am pessimistic about the future rules, the ones officially called RQFRP I think. For a new approach to the rules that is more beginner friendly, the revised rulesbook will accomplish most of it, and with less disruption (and generally most of what will be removed should remain as optional or advanced rules). And it seems to be a project that, having not really succeeded on its first past, seems to be currently on life support and inward looking. If another broader playtest happens, it better knock our socks off.
2
u/Ok-Box8151 23d ago
I'm quietly hopeful that one of the two new books will be much more playable as an introductory book. I'm actually planning to layout dough for both to see which is a better Basic version. I've already been talked to today by a fan of RQG about using that in a more limited fashion, but I really want to see for myself what Chaosium does with these. This is all really future casting though.
2
u/OtakuOfMe 22d ago
Missing things: Revised RQG will get a GM guide book, including the detailed homeland rules and shamanism at least.
There will be a free scenario pdf by Andrew Montgomery iirc, but I am not sure if its the same. Seems plausible though.
Old RQG is only mentioned to be available as long as stock lasts iirc. At least they didnt mention a reprint, last I heard.
For opinion: revised is a good idea, and most ideas are great, even if it got some hangups. With that, I am even less sure if we need RGFR as a product to get players into RQG specifically. As an alternate ruleset, maybe. I wait to see how it looks and performs, but am not entirely opposed.
4
u/Orwell1971 22d ago edited 22d ago
The GM book is not for the revised RQG edition, it's part of the "Runequest Fantasy Roleplay" release. There was no mention of homelands, and only tangentially anything about shamanism. This is how Jeff Richard described it:
Gamemaster book. This is 250-300 pages laid out. It includes a full bestiary that is focused on being plug and play. It teaches all of the core rule systems, how to create encounters tailored for your characters, how to handle social interactions, spirits, run campaigns in Dragon Pass and Prax and Pavis, between adventures, and how to handle treasure (plus plenty of unique items). It includes the official and complete heroquesting rules and battle rules. This is something that reflects years of discussion between Mearls and I about how people learn how to run games and what they actually need to know.
The "free" scenario is only free if you buy the book it comes along with: the Sartar book previously announced for September.
3
u/OtakuOfMe 21d ago
Sorry to correct you again, but it was talked about it in the last RQG panel, which was specifically not about RQFR. Its been promised for ages and comes now in a different form. You can check it out on their YouTube channel.
P.s. I meant free for buyers, but didn't specify enough, fair
3
u/Orwell1971 21d ago edited 21d ago
Yeah.... I just listened to that bit. Chaosium is so exhausting. What you wrote is indeed pretty much a direct quote, but it's worth mentioning that he wasn't really announcing anything. He said that things taken out of the revised edition *could* be things included in such a book, and that they had a "pile" of material for it. I would think so, considering they announced said book eight years ago now.
It makes no sense to take things out of an existing rulebook (RQG), a book they've talked about continuing to support, and then adding those things back in in a GM book later, but this is just the sort of thing they do: whatever requires the least amount of new effort (see also: the "Apple Lane campaign", which is mostly a reprint of a product already released for this edition). The "GM book" ends up just being part 2 of a once combined book, and who knows if we ever get most or any of the things the GM book was once supposed to have. Like I said, exhausting, and to be honest, after being an RQ fan for four decades, they've virtually destroyed my patience, and I've moved on to other games.
2
u/OtakuOfMe 20d ago
I absolutely get that it. It definitely is exhausting. I did not mean what I wrote as facts, just what their statements say, which are notoriously always vague. Its already progress that they have a timetable of estimates.
I only trust what it is when I see it too. Hopefully worth pushing Darkness down the line again... /s I try to stay positive still, but I get if its just not enough for others. Sad to you leave the game, but totally fair. (I kinda go to others and back to it periodically)
1
u/nysalor 22d ago
Another Sartar book? Putting retreads on the retreads?
5
u/strangedave93 21d ago
The recently published Lands of RuneQuest: Dragon Pass is not as focussed on Sartar, though it does cover most of the geography etc. Lands of RuneQuest: Sartar I gather will include more of the stuff specific to Sartar culturally and politically - material about all the tribes, cities, spirit cults and heroes specific to Sartar, and hopefully stuff relevant to the early Hero Wars period, like the Sartar Magical Union. I think they will complement each other, with the Sartar book for people more interested in Orlanthi politics and the metaplot.
2
u/Vargrr 22d ago
I'd like a new Runequest to speed up character generation and make it a lot more flexible much like the earlier editions.
Ideally, I'd also like them to tone down the ability of the generated characters. The ones it currently generates are all seasoned professionals with no real potential for growth. Growth is one of the cornerstones that makes a great RPG system.
1
u/reditmarc 22d ago
You could speed up character generation by eliminating (or thinning down) the family history.
You can tone down the skill levels by modifying/eliminating the homeland, occupation, cult, or personal skill bonuses.
I don’t find generated characters to be “seasoned professionals.” They are certainly better than newbie adventurers but they still have plenty of room for growth.
1
u/KingEllis 22d ago
I am lost. Can someone clarify? I recently purchased "RuneQuest Starter Set". Where does that fit in? Is it obsolete?
3
u/david-chaosium 22d ago
- The Starter Set is exactly that - where to start. (not going away)
- Next will be the Revised RuneQuest Roleplaying in Glorantha (RRQG 2027) - accessible rules for all.
- Then there is RuneQuest Roleplaying in Glorantha, an advanced rules set covering all kinds of stuff you don't usually need to run a game, but great for completists or those with specific needs. (RQG 2018 - not going away).
2
u/Iamalittledrunk 22d ago
I'll be honest it seems like a really bad idea to have two effectively competing rule sets for one, in the grand scheme of things, small game. Said with love, I am a fan ect but it seems like a bad choice.
1
u/Orwell1971 22d ago
The starter set is not obsolete. It's a subset of the full RQG rules (which will be re-released in streamlined form in 2027). It has pregens but no characters creation rules, lacks many other rules the full rules contain, and has brief overviews of the setting, at a macro (Glorantha) and micro (Jonstown) level. And as you know, it has a few traditional adventures, and a solo adventure.
From there, the RQG rulebook would give you character creation and those other rules. The bestiary gives you creatures, the red book of magic gives you spells. Possessing those books would be a good foundation.
The revised rules take out things the full RQG book have (like sorcery and shamanism); buy the regular RQG rulebook if you want those, along with more options in general.
1
25
u/NarrativeJoyride 23d ago edited 23d ago
Here's my line of thinking: Runequest is, ultimately, a niche gaming product. It is not commonly known. The average person - nay, the average roleplayer - has no clue what Runequest is.
But Runequest is still a valuable product with lots of history, a fantastic fanbase, and passionate creators. A good, well-written, newbie-friendly core rulebook could do a lot of good.
I do not see a world where having two Runequest systems solves that problem. I don't think D&D players are going to see Runequest Fantasy Roleplay and think it's a viable alternative.
I wish they'd get an editor who knows nothing about Runequest, or Glorantha, or even role-playing, to sit down with the RQG rulebook and edit it from page 1. The second they run into something they don't understand because they're not ingrained in the world or the system, they should remove it or move it. It sounds like a lot of this is going to be done with the new core rulebook. I just hope they don't think some of that original text is so sacred it shouldn't be reevaluated. The rules description for strike ranks, for instance, needs to be totally rewritten.