Re: RQ2, RQ3 and Lessons to be Learnt

From: Guy_Robinson.sbd-e@rx.xerox.com
Date: Tue 11 Jan 1994 - 19:52:23 EET


Dave Cake raises three issues in response to my comments:

Concerning RQ3 as a publication:
>
>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.

I assessed RQ3 as RULES and found it lacking. Thinking about the rules
that I like I rejected the publication. My perspective was that I had a good
enough rule system in RQ2 and RQ3 did not add anything worth while. However
I did decide that the Magic Book was worth picking up and subsequently bought
a second hand copy.

Concerning RQ2 as a publication:

>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.

My Glorantha was in the RQ2 book. The UK gaming oral tradition was strong
enough for people to relate details of the background. Take Stormbull for
example. I have never read a direct write-up of this cult but I feel that
I have enough details to use it in a game. Part of this was due to the
gaming community's enthusiasm for this product.

The rest I could make up myself, with a little imagination.

The "contemplate and feel" of RQ3 and RQ4:

>Agreed. I am certainly not in favour of removing them [the Runes] - 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.

I have already stated that some of the RQ3 shamantic rules are acceptable
and no doubt the RQIV shamantic material contains usefull concepts as
well. Do not misinterpret me, I am not a "Rune" fan but an admirer of
the "RuneQuest" background. I assert that RQ3 was more Basic Roleplaying
than RuneQuest.

Given that I judged RQ3 to be a mistake I believe that the magic system
should be encouraged to develop in a manner that is consistent with
the task of promoting that unique Gloranthan style of society. By the
term Gloranthan I mean mainly the area and culture described in the
RQ2 rule book, my core, published reference.

Note that I have refered to my judgement of RQ3 in the past tense.

I liked the "contemplate and feel" of the RQ society as largely
suggested by rules and background within the RQ2 book. If the writers
of RQIV can come with something as satisfying then I believe it will
be successfull. I, and no doubt a large number of other role
players, will ultimately judge it against RQ2.

I would love to assess RQIV and but I believe that it is unethical for
me to pull the RQIV 2nd draft by ftp and read it without permission of

the company involved. I have applied to playtest the latest release.

Regards

        -- Guy Robinson --


0,,


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:31:10 EEST