Big announcement today?

[Deleriad]

I'm not in the business but if SW is going to a deluxe hardcover model for the SW corebook it could be that PEG have decided they weren't doing well enough with the digest model. That would be a shame. I personally think that the digest model is a good one but that's only from my viewing position.

My hasn't this thread moved on?!

RE: PEG and the Deluxe edition of SW. This will be a limited print run. They are doing a large format hardcover simply for the "deluxeness" of it and to cater to that segment of their customers who prefer hardcovers. Immediately after the current SWEX (3rd printing) sells out, they will turn the deluxe edition into the standard explorers edition format. They are in fact currently converting other large format titles into the same small format. Interestingly, they get their books printed in Asia and it takes about 4 months to get it done and then into the distribution chain. In contrast Mongoose get their printing in the USA.

That's good to know. As someone who just plays games it's clear there's a fair amount of ferment in the rpg publishing world right now. From the outside it looks like the digest model is a good one in that it keeps the core rules cheap enough to be, effectively, sold by the supplements.

What slightly concerns me is that Matt was referring to A&E, Monster Coliseum and Empires as "core books." If that route is taken then we end up in the same situation as before where a setting book might have to depend on 3 core books. As a player I'm happy to look at a new setting, say "shiny" and then pay extra to get a core book if I don't already have it. Compare that to Pavis Rises. If I were a new player interested in getting this exciting looking campaign that promises to introduce me to Glorantha I would also need to buy the RQ core book, Glorantha 2A core book and Cults of Glorantha. Then I would need Monster Coliseum. That's an extreme example but I wouldn't like to wake up in 18 months time and find out that nothing's changed except the size and price of the books.

 

[Rungard]

Yet, when it comes to actual playing, I always feel a little constrained in Glorantha. Yes, YGWV and all that, but my gaming group always preferred a good adventure over depth.

I also think a good adventure will always be more important than depth. In any setting. But that doesn't make me like Glorantha less. I think Glorantha is all you want it to be. For me, it is a good source of ideas to create scenarios and campaigns and I use the background information as long as it doesn't interfere with the adventures I create.

Even now, when we've taken up actual playing after a very long time. Glorantha IS daunting to new GM:s, since there is so much to take in, and I can see that that alone can hold people back from the game.

But that also happens with any detailed setting, don't you think? Like Forgotten Realms and many others.

I will sadly miss the 2nd age, that in my opinion holds promise of more adventure than 3rd age. I will continue work on my 2nd age Karia campaign and I think that the material published this far (counting in MRQ1) will last for a very long time for us.

I agree with you. Do you keep a chronicle of your campaign on the Internet? I'd like to read it. :wink:

 

[PhilHibbs]

What slightly concerns me is that Matt was referring to A&E, Monster Coliseum and Empires as "core books." If that route is taken then we end up in the same situation as before where a setting book might have to depend on 3 core books.

I think " core" just means "non-setting-specific" rather than "compulsory".

 

[Vile]

I think the Traveller model was, well, a model way of doing things. The Traveller Core Book is one of the most comprehensive and playable all-in-one RPGs I'e seen for a long time. I would hope Wayfarer follows this example rather than having too many separate core books.

Let's hope we get some official information on what means what.

 

[Morgan d'Barganfore]

I think that's about right (re non-setting specific etc)

 

[drdentista]

Yet, when it comes to actual playing, I always feel a little constrained in Glorantha. Yes, YGWV and all that, but my gaming group always preferred a good adventure over depth.

I also think a good adventure will always be more important than depth. In any setting. But that doesn't make me like Glorantha less. I think Glorantha is all you want it to be. For me, it is a good source of ideas to create scenarios and campaigns and I use the background information as long as it doesn't interfere with the adventures I create.

Even now, when we've taken up actual playing after a very long time. Glorantha IS daunting to new GM:s, since there is so much to take in, and I can see that that alone can hold people back from the game.

But that also happens with any detailed setting, don't you think? Like Forgotten Realms and many others.

I will sadly miss the 2nd age, that in my opinion holds promise of more adventure than 3rd age. I will continue work on my 2nd age Karia campaign and I think that the material published this far (counting in MRQ1) will last for a very long time for us.

I agree with you. Do you keep a chronicle of your campaign on the Internet? I'd like to read it. :wink:

Sorry, no chronicle (yet, anyway...) Actual gameplay haven't started yet, it's in the writing phase (which for me as the GM is the most rewarding part). But I've managed to spur interest in my old gaming group (we haven't played since the late 80:s and as a starter (while writing Karia) we play a little oldschool D&D (Caverns of Thracia) to keep the interest up Actually I'm quite proud of this, being able to gather 5 40 something guys (with spouses, small kids, demanding jobs, houses and very little free time) to play a whole day once a month...
I think that the Karia campaign will take off this summer, and maybe, if there's time, I will keep a gaming chronicle

 

[Morgan d'Barganfore]

I usually keep one but nothing sophisticated - just an A4 pad kept in a plastic sleeve.