Another One Bites the Dust....

[Rurik]

Another thread has gone missing.

Too bad, the questions and answers at the beginning of the "questions from a new GM" thread were pretty constructive before it turned into circular argument.

Either way I have some houserules adding Levels, Classes, and ballooning HP's if anyone is interested....

 

[frogspawner]

Yes, it's a shame. Much though I'd like to think Mongoose care about the rules enough to have deleted it because of the "MRQ is too close to D&D" comments, I suspect it was more probably the unfavourable price-comparisons with RQ3/BRP (not to mention RQ2!).

Either way I have some houserules adding Levels, Classes, and ballooning HP's if anyone is interested....

You just couldn't wait for MRQ2, could you? :wink:

 

[Rurik]

Yes, it's a shame. Much though I'd like to think Mongoose care about the rules enough to have deleted it because of the "MRQ is too close to D&D" comments, I suspect it was more probably the unfavourable price-comparisons with RQ3/BRP (not to mention RQ2!).

Well I think the price comparisons were way off. Part of what you are paying for is the physical books. Comparing the BRP Monographs to Hardcover (and color in the case of Monsters) is way off.

Just about everyone would have preferred the Core and Companion in one $35-$40 book, but other than that he was way off. RQ3 was $40 for Deluxe (and $45 if you bought the GM and Players Box seperately) for ultra flimsy paperbacks - and that was over 20 years ago!

But now I am getting into an argument I decided to stay out of...

Still, I hate when constructive threads get deleted just because someone missed the Google band wagon...

Either way I have some houserules adding Levels, Classes, and ballooning HP's if anyone is interested....

You just couldn't wait for MRQ2, could you? :wink:

Actually I'm an oldtimer - so I like to think of this release as "Basic RQ". I am waiting for "Advanced RQ".[/quote]

 

[branmakmuffin]

Still, I hate when constructive threads get deleted just because someone missed the Google band wagon...

Is that the Google stock bandwagon, money-bags?

Ya know, I see a link to a FAQ, but I don't see a link to a ToU. Some message boards run by companies forbid mentioning competing products (and downloading off Torrent and such).

Now, that may have been in the e-mail I got when I registered, but if Mongoose is serious about such a policy, they need to put it in a ToU and they need a link to the ToU that I can find.

Or they can send me a nasty-gram (which hasn't happened yet) or ban me from the board.

 

[Rurik]

Still, I hate when constructive threads get deleted just because someone missed the Google band wagon...

Is that the Google stock bandwagon, money-bags?

Yup. Sure is.

Though I don't bring that up because I own Google stock, and never have. I brought it up because you seem to have a deep resentment towards people who can stomach the cost of MRQ, and as far as I tell you somehow blame Google.

I'm not gonna argue with you after this. I actually agree with many of your basic points, but you just come across as argumentative.

MRQ is on the expensive side as far as RPG books go no doubt, but no more than many other publisher's games. If the hobby is getting too expensive for you find another one or stick to cheaper products. As I said in my last post, I managed to afford $40 for RQ3 when released, and I was only 15 at the time, long before Google stock existed.

Is MRQ much more like D&D than earlier versions? Absolutely. Is it the same game? No way. No Classes, no levels, no alignments, and most importantly no one running around with 114 hit points.

Now excuse me while I go figure out new ways to belittle those bastards who bought Google stock when I didn't. That'll learn them.

 

[vitalis6969]

And another thread is going to go down in the fires of the Troll... :roll:

-V

 

[frogspawner]

(What? The thread's still here? OK, this one could finish it off...)

I'm an old-timer too, so here's an idea I think is constructive: reprint RQ2 verbatim*.
A complete system in 120 pages of pure gold. I'll pre-order two copies right here, right now.

(* OK, if you want to think you've earned your editor's pay, not quite verbatim: lose the 6 pages of character sheets and 3 pages of Kyger Litor/Black Fang cults and substitute short Gods of Glorantha-style cult write-ups for the standard (Cults of Prax) religions, plus a few more Sartar-oriented ones if they fit; and of course incorporate the errata that were published inside the covers of later editions).

 

[Rurik]

Heresy!

How dare you suggest getting rid of the Sapienza character sheets!

Do you know how many trees would have been saved over the past 30 years if all RPG character sheets had that level of information density?

 

[Quire]

Seconded. I even dedicated my alternate RQ character sheet to the man.

- Q

 

[branmakmuffin]

I brought it up because you seem to have a deep resentment towards people who can stomach the cost of MRQ, and as far as I tell you somehow blame Google.

What? I could've written that people are rich because they are descended from aliens who possess the technology to turn toast into gold.

Resentment? No. Disbelief is more like it.

I'm not gonna argue with you after this. I actually agree with many of your basic points, but you just come across as argumentative.

That's 'cause I am.

MRQ is on the expensive side as far as RPG books go no doubt, but no more than many other publisher's games.

The old "others do it so it's OK if I do it, too" excuse.

Is MRQ much more like D&D than earlier versions? Absolutely. Is it the same game? No way. No Classes, no levels, no alignments, and most importantly no one running around with 114 hit points.

All the differences you mention are mere window dressing.

Now excuse me while I go figure out new ways to belittle those bastards who bought Google stock when I didn't. That'll learn them.

Turn their gold into toast.

 

[vitalis6969]

(What? The thread's still here? OK, this one could finish it off...)

I'm an old-timer too, so here's an idea I think is constructive: reprint RQ2 verbatim*.

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.........................

It's freakin fine the way it is....

All you ol'timers go back and play your original, don't muck this one up... :lol:

-V

hmmm, maybe my post will be the last before some unmentionable a$$hat gets this thread killed too.... :roll:

 

[frogspawner]

How dare you suggest getting rid of the Sapienza character sheets!

Perish the thought! Obviously they would be the core of the "Collector's Edition Supplement", to be published shortly after...
(I'm not pre-ordering that one, though :wink: )

 

[Magistus]

All you ol'timers go back and play your original, don't muck this one up... :lol:

I'm an old timer, and I quite like the new version of RQ. Just can't wait till more new content is out.

 

[weasel_fierce]

I guess Im the odd one out, since I like all the versions of RQ so far.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Yes, it's a shame. Much though I'd like to think Mongoose care about the rules enough to have deleted it because of the "MRQ is too close to D&D" comments, I suspect it was more probably the unfavourable price-comparisons with RQ3/BRP (not to mention RQ2!).

MRQ *is* undoubtably closer to the d20 system than RQ2/3 were to AD&D, and given that one of the attractions of RQ2/3 was that it *wasn't* AD&D, I think it is only to be expected that this kind of complaint will arise from time to time. The games are not the same, however, and although complainers are probably immune to reasoned argument, I'd sooner see that than the threads deleted. (It should also be born in mind that one of the reasons that MRQ and D20 are more similar is the adoption of RQ concepts into D20...)

On the other hand, if Mongoose are objecting to proce comparisons then they only have themselves to blame. They are the ones who decided to 'follow the industry trend' adopted by virtually no other publishers and produce multiple slim harbacks limited by the page count rather than producing books of an appropriate size to deal with the subject in hand.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Yes, it's a shame. Much though I'd like to think Mongoose care about the rules enough to have deleted it because of the "MRQ is too close to D&D" comments, I suspect it was more probably the unfavourable price-comparisons with RQ3/BRP (not to mention RQ2!).

Neither - we have never banned opinions on the forums. Threads only tend to get deleted when people get offensive.

 

[MongooseMatt]

produce multiple slim harbacks limited by the page count rather than producing books of an appropriate size to deal with the subject in hand.

Your wish is our command - the new printing facility has already allowed us to increase the page count of the RQ Slaine book by more than 100 pages, and subsequent books will also have page counts dictated by content, not the pricing matrix of a traditional printer. . .

 

[elgrin]

thank you - the current pile of volumes I am carting to each session I GM would make your average pack mule baulk.
This does not however commit me to purchasing a whole series of 'combined reprints' - Oh no!

elgrin

 

[Baron Meliadus]

Your wish is our command - the new printing facility has already allowed us to increase the page count of the RQ Slaine book by more than 100 pages, and subsequent books will also have page counts dictated by content, not the pricing matrix of a traditional printer. . .

So what are the projected page counts for the Eternal Champion books? I, as a fan of Moorcock, am eagerly awaiting the Mongoose version of Hawkmoon... but I recently heard a rumor that although the Hawkmoon book is over 100 pages in length, over half of it is basically a reprint of all the game system rules I already have in the main MRQ book.

Even if Hawkmoon is 128 pages long, I wouldn't be very happy if less than 64 pages of it was actually new material concerning the world of the Runestaff.

Is Mongoose going down the path of artificially expanding their book sizes by reprinting needless pages of rules which we all already own?

Can you enlighten us on this issue?

 

[MongooseMatt]

So what are the projected page counts for the Eternal Champion books? I, as a fan of Moorcock, am eagerly awaiting the Mongoose version of Hawkmoon... but I recently heard a rumor that although the Hawkmoon book is over 100 pages in length, over half of it is basically a reprint of all the game system rules I already have in the main MRQ book.

Even if Hawkmoon is 128 pages long, I wouldn't be very happy if less than 64 pages of it was actually new material concerning the world of the Runestaff.

Is Mongoose going down the path of artificially expanding their book sizes by reprinting needless pages of rules which we all already own?

Well, no, but it all depends on your perspective of 'needless'. The Eternal Champion series will be self-contained rulebooks (no RQ main rulebook needed) as they will stand on their own as separate game lines, using common rules sets.

Hawkmoon and Elric have less than 50 pages of common rules with RQ, the rest being either rules unique to them, or background. You could look at it this way - you are paying just $5 more to have everything in one place. However, to directly answer your question, no - if we can find something useful to put into a book, we are now free to include it without being hammered on costs. But we are not looking at padding our books out - if nothing else, padding puts more work on our editors and layout guys, which would be self-defeating!


* Just realised I have admitted to the existence of the Eternal Champion series - fortunately, I was just about to make the official announcement *