From: David Cake (davidc@cs.uwa.oz.au)
Date: Tue 11 Jan 1994 - 10:52:14 EET
> It was a game that provided a distinct background when other games commonly
> suggested playing against a setting of medicore, blended fantasy. Races
> other games would have dismissed as monsters were represent as fellow
> sentients. Great encouragements existed to allow people to advance socially
> as the only reward for combat for combat sake was commonly death itself.
>
Yes. I don't think that this was lost with RQ3 - but it didn't come
across well in the rules. Elder Secrets and the reissued troll stuff was great
for non-humans. Much of the source maintained the same rich culture. But it
didn't come across as well in the rules book.
> Rather than just supply different sets of magic RuneQuest actually appeared
> to be prepared to talk myths and concepts first. The Runes were not water
> tight in their conception, of course, but they gave a strong flavour to an
> abitiously complex rule book.
>
Agreed. I am certainly not in favour of removing them - but I think that as
the vision Greg and others had of Gloranthan magic, the Runic concept became
less important, and I think that we should be encouraging development of
the magic system in other ways, not just trying to recapture as much of the
RQ2 flavour. For example RQ3 shamans are better developed than RQ2 shamans, and
RQ4 are better than either, and parts of RQ4 like spirit lore, banishment,
more spirit plane stuff, all help add depth and flavour to that part of the
magic system - and in the process departing further from the 'runic' concept.
>
> For me the other publications associated with RuneQuest came as part of an
> oral tradition where people would enthuse about the rich background and
> shudder about the largely unwanted whimsey of those anthropomorphic ducks.
>
Which other publications? For me, RQ2 without the cults books was an exercise
in frustration - a nice rules system fairly closely tied to a world you
knew too little about.
The adventures where fine, and I suspect that Borderlands, Pavis,
Griffon Mountain, etc. where a large part of why they loved RQ2. Only recently
has RQ3 begun producing adventures of comparable calibre.
> RuneQuest 3 could have done a number of things. I was hoping that it
> would gather the rules which you had to glean from the description of
> each spell. I would have like to have seen single-line references to
> the Priest-Shaman in the RQ2 rules expanded, for example.
>
Hmm... I was hoping for a bit more than that. I am starting to see what I
wanted from RQ3 with RQ4 and Pendragon.
> Instead what was delivered with essentially Basic Roleplaying 2 with the
> RuneQuest badge. Too much work was put into producing a generic work
> rather than servicing and preserving the RuneQuest line. The blandness
> nearly swallowed RuneQuest. I was totally uninspired when I read what
> I was finally able to afford.
>
Well, I didn't mind the blandness - because I used RQ3 as RULES. Sorry to
shout, but I read them, thought about which rules I liked, decided most where
OK, some overdue, and some ill-considered. I already had some great RQ2
supplements - I still had Glorantha, I didn't need to buy it again.
The problem was it didn't grab the new guys. Those of us who loved
Glorantha already seemed to mostly (with a few exceptions) hang around until
our faith was rewarded with Genertela, SunCounty, and TOTRM (3 cheers!). But
it was the people with no RQ2 stuff that were ignored.
> For RQIV to be built from RQ3 is disheartening for those reasons.
>
For RQ4 to ignore the changes in RQ3 and return to the simplistic, often
limited, now rather outdated looking rules of RQ2 would be just as stupid as
for it to ignore the criticisms of RQ3.
RQ4 is coming into existence in a very different gaming hobby than it
ancestor RQ1 (and the very similar RQ2). RQ2 was groundbreaking, and now it
is history - fondly remembered, but looking pretty simplistic by todays
standards. RQ3 at least looks like they tried. RQ4 lets hope they get it right.
> The contents and presentation of the fourth edition of RuneQuest should
> be guided by good writing and carefull attention to the market. Revive
> RQ2's spirit in a modern, flexible manner, with the more worthy parts of
> RQ3, and you may find that the market awakes.
>
Was someone suggesting something else?
RQ2's spirit was the spirit of Glorantha, as embodied in Cults of Prax and
Cults of Terror and many excellent scenarios. There are very are very few parts
of RQ3 where RQ2 had an obviously better system - often a simpler and also
less complete system, but seldom just a better one. The worst parts of RQ3
are not the replacements, but the extensions that didn't really work very
well due to lack of playtesting. RQ4 can't just aim for what RQ2 did - it
needs to aim for what RQ3 tried for and failed, but succeed.
> A lot of RQ devotees, formerly sated with their purchases, might awake
> and those who have heard of this well-respected game might seek to
> explore this game whose roots lie in the dawn of modern roleplaying.
>
If RQ4 is going to succeed, it is not going to succeed as well-respected
history, it is going to succeed by being a game that is good by todays
standards. We can do that.
> Regards
>
> -- Guy Robinson --
>
Cheers
Dave the model of tact and diplomacy :-)
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:31:10 EEST