haargald said:
So I have to ask: Why are you so active on this part of the Mongoose forum? Yes I know it is a free world, and I'm really not trying to pick a fight with you, but you have said numerous times you don't like the system and seem to regret purchasing it, so why are you here? I am interested in those posts that would suggest alternative rules or modifications to the rules, that makes sense to see here, but to just come and say that is wrong, that is lame, what Mongoose did there was stupid, and this game is poor... what is the point?
Good Question. I don't consider that picking a fight. Orginally I came here to find out about what was happening with RQ. Then I started to discuss the various thing that we saw in the Previews. Intiattly I was inclined to give the benefit of tthe dobut, but that changed as more info came out. A few weeks back, I had given up on the game and was leaving the boards when it was revealed that the thing that really started people off against the new system (the two attack roll mechanic) was an error. So I stuck around, not wanting to condem the game on a rule that didn't exist.
Now I am here mostly out of curirosity as to hw others are reacting to MRQ., and just who lieks it and who doesn't. One interesting thing to me is that most of the MRQ supporters seem to be people who have started posting in the last week, wheras the detractor are those who came here months ago curois about the new RQ.
There is also the fact (previously raised by a Mongooose employee) that all feeback, even negative feedback serves a purpose. If there was no negative feeback it would most likely create a false impression of the sitatuion. Sort of the "yes-man" syndrome.If everyone here just kept praising MOngoose for everything they did, there would be no point in a forum at all. In the weeks and moths to come, the real future of the game is going to be decided in the sales figures. If the game sells like hotcakes, then it's not going to make a bit of difference what the detractors think. On the other hand, if the game doesn't sell, then the first thing Mongoose will want to do is to find out what people didn't like about the game.
Now as for suggesting rule alterations and modifications, I have done a little of this, but the problem is there is only so far I can go with that without it turninginto an ad for RQ2 or RQ3. Practically everything that people has mentioned having problmes with in MRQ can be fixed by patching in something from an earlier edition. But, in my mind, why not just use the whole RQ3 book instead? So I don't go there that much.
I also stay around to defend my postion, and sometimes that of others too. THere have been times where som people have made posts with claims. I am big on seeing them back it up. ASome of the "pro" crowd have made claims that rather than support, they dropped when such claims were not instantly accepted as gospel.
I also have been keeping my feelings about the game out of threads where it doesn't seem to belong. Like if someone wants to run a 3rd age Glornathan campaing, or Star Wars game, I am not going to go and tell them not to do it. If someone likes this game, good for them.
I have also stuck around becuase there are some threads, such as this one, where I think my opinion is not only valid, but practically solicited. THe "is the name a problem" tpoic seems right down the alley of all the old RQ crowd who have expressed disappointment over MRQ.
THen there is the fact that the Comapnion has't come out yet, and I can always be optiomistic that somethings, say a mount's damage bounus adding to charge attacks, might be considered "extra" material.
Plus there is the point that the game did just come out this week, so it's not like I've hung around here for a long time saying "it sucks" in every thread.
As to why I am active in this forum compared to others, that's easy. I don't like d20 and don't play it. Since most of what Mongoose writes has been d20 related, there isn't muchreason for me to go there.
But, maybe it is time to move on.