From: devinc@aol.com
Date: Fri 18 Feb 1994 - 03:31:34 EET
Devin Cutler here:
I know that I was already pretty much thrashed for suggesting that RQAiG be
My main problem with the way RQ3 and the Renaissance products have been
in binder format, but, well, here I am again.
formatted is that one ends up having to look through many different sources
to find what one wa
nts. Now, currently, with the lack of supplements and materials, that's not
yet a big problem, but if (and I hope it is so) RQAiG is supported as
promised, then the dispersal of information is going to be a problem.
Examples?
Creature stats are, even now, scattered amongst:
RQ3 rulebook
Cults threaten to do the same. Already a person considering joining a new
How many separate books am I going to have to bring with me to a session
It would seem to me that the only way to congeal information into single
I would frankly like to see a rules binder, a creatures binder, and a cults
Binders would also allow revisions and rules changes to be implemented
Also, since it seems to be the philosophy of the RQ Renaissance people to
Without this type of modularity, it in fact becomes impossible to continue
Gloranthan Bestiary
Troll Pak (RQ3 version) - insects and troll types
River of Cradles (for info on Gorps)
Dorastor Land of Doom
Elder Secrets
cult as a new character must look through GoG, RoC, and Sun County. The flip
side is that we also end up with duplication of material, such as the now
infamous proliferation of Kyger Litor writeups (each one slightly different
from the other, I might add).
simply because the material I need (or might need on the spur of the moment)
is scattered amongst a horde of supplements?
sources, while still retaining the flexibility to add new info (like new
cults or new monsters) is to modularize it. The best way to modularize is via
binders.
binder. The cults binder could be organized into pantheons, such that gods
with different aspects worshipped by different pantheons could be properly
categorized. Creatures could be organized by type (i.e. Chaos creatures,
darkness creatures, etc.). In this way, new creatures could be added, one per
page.
painlessly. by simply producing and selling a package of new pages replacing
old rules, etc.
have each product be self-contained and ready to play (e.g. the Sun County
has the Yelmalio cult in it so that people can play without reference to
GoG), this material could be included as a separate binder page sold with the
supplement, so that when people have purchased the cults binder or whatever,
the page can then be added to the binder.
with the philosophy of trying to have each supplement self-contained, unless
this means that a cult writeup is going to be represented in every supplement
in which the cult is prominent (i.e. are we going to see another writeup of
Yelmalio in t
he Lunar Pack, another in Elf pack, another in Sartar Pack [but that would be
Elmal, wouldn'
t it?]). Such repitition is to be avoided.
Now, in my previous posting, people expressed criticisms regarding the
flimsiness of binder pages and the incompatability of hole standards.
1) Take a look at ASL. The paper is tough and of high quality. ASL buffs leaf
2) If Europe uses a two hole standard and US 3 holes, then simply produce the
through the rules far more than any RQer is likely to do, yet my experience
has been that these hold up excellently. Plastic reinforcements can be added
during production to further reinforce.
pages with five holes! Not very difficult to do. Sell different binders for
US and E
uropean markets (it's not that hard to find a supplier in each region).
On a different vein, I would prefer to see new RQ supplements without
For instance, Sun County and River of Cradles could have been combined sans
scenarios in them. Scenarios are basically one-shot items. You run them and,
except for a recurring NPC or such, you are then finished with them. To weigh
down excellent source material like Sun County and RoC with what becomes
useless material is burdensome. I like scenarios that are sold alone and
packaged like Apple Lane and Snake Pipe Hollow. That way, one can buy the
source material without the scenario, in case one wants to run scenarios of
his own, or in case the scenario does not fit into his campaign. I am not
saying that the scenarios are bad. I think they h
ave been great. It's just that they would be better presented as "modules"
(oops, did I use an AD&D term here?).
scenarios into a single comprehensive guide of the Zola Fel area. The
scenarios could have then been presented separately, as a Zola Fel scenario
pack. At the very least, perhaps, scenarios could be detachable or wrapped
together but in different booklets.
Now is the time to plan ahead.
Devin Cutler
devinc@aol.com
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:35:33 EEST