From: Joerg Baumgartner (rq4@sartar.toppoint.de)
Date: Fri 14 Jan 1994 - 10:06:50 EET
Disclaimer: I started RQ with the Games Workshop RQ3 edition, and only
recently under great difficulties managed to obtain the almost full set of
RQ2 publications, some of these even in the original.
Dave Cake writes:
[replying to Guy Robinson]
>> 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.
> Well, The only real big change in the main rules book was the new character
> creation system which has good points and bad points when compared with RQ2,
> but I can well understand not likeing it.
There were sensible points, e.g. real use of the D100 (instead of the D20x5
use of RQ2), less weight on dubious guilds when learning skills (in fact,
to find a teacher was put into the domain of roleplaying, not rolplyaing for
acception), and the opening into "generic" fantasy roleplaying was a plus
for me, too.
There were mediocre addings, like Fatigue, split hit locations (good idea,
not so convincing execution IMHO), and then there were the changes to the
magic system.
> Actually, I would have thought that most of the changes that really
> divide opinions where in the Magic Book, that is certainly my experience.
Here the "bad" changes were the excessive weight of shamans in the
description of Spirit Magic, the omission of Runelords (and a short summary
to why and how the Divine Magic were changed the way they were, be it only
on the RQ2->3 conversion leaflet), and the God Learnerish exclusivity of the
three magic systems.
The introduction of sorcery was a good thing, good enough to inspire the
first edition of Ars Magica (at least that's my impression), but the
versatility the system offered did not go far enough for the specialists
(I think of spontaneous magic), or did go too far (nearly unlimited Intensity
manipulation for the lowliest student).
The enchanting rules and the introduction of all the necessary spirits were
IMO clearly on the plus side.
>> 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.
I've just extracted all the references to the world from the RQ2 rulesbook,
and what I found was a multitude of tantalising hints at a great world
noone outside of oral tradition (see below) could really play on, because
most of the information missed. I can only second Dave in this regard.
> Ah... the oral tradition in Perth (often claimed to be the most isolated
> city in the world) is not as strong. For example, no one in Perth that is
> still involved in the gaming community appears to own any Wyrms Footnotes
> before Number 9. No one. That information is not known to anybody at all.
> The gaming community in Perth were certainly enthusiastic about RQ2,
> but still they owned very little of the published stuff. Stuff that is only
> passed on orally is not very reliable.
Oral tradition in Kiel was non-existent, because it was me who built up the
RuneQuest environment. I know about one little used copy of RQ1 in this city,
which was disused in favor of the (then) richer background of AD&D (and lacking
Glorantha enthusiasm).
Glorantha background wasn't around here before the RQ3 modules Gods of
Glorantha ad the genertela Box hit the market. They are still in the shelf,
and I make sure the specialist dealer keeps well stocked in RQ. BTW, both
the German and Engish versions. (Generally RQ has a good shelf presence
in Germany, at least in the specialist stores; the problem is that the
department stores cater only in the two or three mainstream systems (AD&D
and two originally German ones), so that real newcomers are not aware
of RQ's existence.
> And bear in mind that a major goal of RQ4 is to attract new players,
> and that was presumably a major goal of RQ3 as well - at which it failed.
> I think that part of the reason was that gaps in the available information
> were not apparent to Chaosium or much of the old RQ2 community, who already
> had a mass of Glorantha information, and could easily extrapolate RQ3 stats
> from RQ2 ones etc. However, I think that the gamers cut off from that source
> of RQ2 information - like those new players not part of a gaming community
> full of RQ2 players - had a frustrating lack of information.
Yes. If RQ4 is to be centered on Glorantha, then it **MUST** come with a
reasonable introduction into the world, which a) creates the general feel,
b) conveys enough information to start playing in one region of the GM's
choice. An expanded version of the Genertela Player Book (not the tables
of land of origin and occupation at the end, but the introductions into
Hsunchen, Praxian, Orlanthi and western culture should be slightly expanded,
and a Lunar/Solar culture, and maybe one eastern culture) should be added.
>> The rest I could make up myself, with a little imagination.
> And quite a bit of time. And you would end up with something rather
> different to someone elses version of Glorantha.
In fact, a _generic_ fantasy word with a few nams and elements from
Glorantha - sorry to be mean, but I mean it.
> As to the "feel" of RQ2 and RQ3 - as I said, for me RQ2 was not a
> truly great game until Cults of Prax and Terror. Until then it ranked
> as a decent set of rules with an interesting but incomplete world. I played it,
> but I did not hold it in especially high regard. It was CoP and CoT that made
> it a great game. Of course, that all human characters where in Orlanth or
> Black Fang (I barely new the names of any others) was a bit of a disadvantage.
> My biggest gripe with RQ3 was that the great cults supplements failed to
> materialise.
Don't forget the Pavis sets, still the most lively fantasy rpg setting I
have read, not in little part due to the Cart Chaper Griselda story. You
could read it and breath Pavis' air.
> The RQ2 rules book is certainly no longer my core puclished reference. That
> honour would go to Genertela or King of Sartar, both of which I read for
> pleasure quite a bit. For RQ2 it would be Cults of Terror introduction, and
> Cults of Prax.
The CoT introduction still is the most comprehensive picture of Glorantha I
know. The four concepts make it clear that the Dragon Pass theist (Orlanthi)
and theist-naturalist (Praxian) cultures are but two facets of the magics
available there (e.g. the currently (1615-21 ST) extinct, but soon to be
revived EWF dragon magics). Still almost no word has been lost about how the
hybrid magics in the regions between the main philosphies look like. I think
future supplements which deal with cultural wizardry in pure and hybrid form
will manage to end the arguments abut whether sorcery (or in fact any magic
besides Rune and Combat magic) has a place in Glorantha.
-- Joerg Baumgartner rq4@sartar.toppoint.de 0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:31:16 EEST