Just a Little Confused...

[GrimJesta]

Runequest has a special place in my black heart, as it was one of our games of choice in my Sophomore-Senior years in high school circa 1992-1994. We were a band of poor white and black kids from bad neighborhoods that found gaming (and punk) as our anti-drug/anti-violence to an extant, so gaming is really, really important to who I am. I'd probably implode if RQ was d20... and that's my question:

RQ is still going to be almost the old system, yes?? It isn't going to be d20!?! I know it's said that RQ4 will be easy to convert into from RQ3, but that doesn't mean you can't use that line for a d20 game. So I'm worried.

If this *is* the same system I've come to hold high on a pedestal, color me giddy.

-=Grim=-

 

[Rurik]

It is NOT D20.

It is based on the previous RQ rules, though I have sean it described as 'streamlined'. The stats are the same. It has been said you can use monster stats fronm old material unchanged and converting old characters will be easy. Thats about all I know.

I predict some people will love the changes and some will hate them (really going out on a limb here...)

Lets hope they do RQ right. The game and we long time fans deserve it.

Why all the hate? Is Nyarlathotep really that bad?

 

[andakitty]

Mongoose Matt said, over on rpg.net, that it would bear about a 90% resemblance to the RQ we know and love, and that it would be fairly easy to use old RQ supplements such as Pavis and Griffin Mountain with it.

 

[Lieutenant Rasczak]

Mongoose Matt said, over on rpg.net, that it would bear about a 90% resemblance to the RQ we know and love, and that it would be fairly easy to use old RQ supplements such as Pavis and Griffin Mountain with it.

Phew, thank Lhankor Mhy for that!

 

[andakitty]

I am still on pins and needles, because after all RQ3 wasn't much more than 10% different from RQ2. Lets just hope that this time the changes really do go back to 'more playable'. Almost everything they changed for RQ3 I did'nt like. This time, from everything I've been able to piece together-so far-it sounds like a shift in the right direction. Easy on the GM, lots of options for the players, and the capability to use it for settings other than Glorantha without losing its very special feel. For me RQ3 failed on two of those counts, maybe all three. We'll soon see.

 

[t-tauri]

The killer for RQ3 wasn't the rule changes which were mostly minimal and low level. Most of them weren't game breakers, it was the removal of Glorantha from the core of the system which killed it.

Of the non-Gloranthan releases only the Vikings supplement really worked. Land of Ninja, the non-Gloranthan monsters, the Monster Collosseum and the crappy character sheets were all poor sellers and started the decline into the morass of RPG Third Division north. Poor sales for these plus Chaosium's usually inability to hit the backside of a deadline with a banjo for the (excellent) Gloranthan stuff started to put AH off. The fact that AH's own RPGs were turgid pieces of nonsense which even science and maths graduates like my gaming group found too heavy a demand on their maths skills killed off AH's foray into RPGs and the Dark Ages settled.

RQ must have Glorantha at the core, else it is destined to fail. Why do other settings for RQ? Stick to the one that works.

 

[Archer]

Hmm, and I thought the complex licence that existed beween Avalon Hill and Chaosium, that required Chaosium to create all Glorantha based material, had something with do with it. Especially since Avalon Hill deemed it too much work involved compared the profits. They did what they could to gain profit from the license.

That their ventures was not very popular or successful is another matter. It really did not have much to do with the decline of RQ. 90-95 was a tough time for RPGs, and many game companies went to their graves, many games disappeared forever. RPGs was not as popular anymore as they were in the middle of the 80s.

 

[TrippyHippy]

I think what 'killed' RQ3 more than anything else was the cost - £40 in the mid-eighties for a box set was a lot of money, back then.

The re-issue of slim, hardback and inexpensive books was the approach taken by Games Workshop to make the game more accessible in 1986 - but by then, they'd already began to promote their own WFRP much more heavily anyway.

That said, I do think that the game could do with losing a bit of the complexity of system and ensuring that the art/design direction of the line is better thought out. RQ3 was a very dry read and it did seem a little over-technical. The setting material inside deluxe was actually quite dull too, truth be told. All of these factors can be sorted out by a good professional overhaul, which is what I believe is going to happen this time round.

With the d20 bubble waning, I think the re-release of a popular and celebrated, alternative fantasy system is a clever business move on Mongoose's part. The release of some new, stylishly packaged Glorantha material in addition to this is good news for the fans.

To add to this though, I would like to see the Runequest/OGL/BRP (whatever!) rules adapted to different settings. I have already mentioned that they'd be ideal for Lord of the Rings and Dune, but what about all sorts of historical settings? Ancient Japan, Westerns, Napoleonic Europe, Vikings, Ancient Rome or Greece. There is so much potential with that system if it builds up the right type of momentum of support.

 

[Archer]

I think what 'killed' RQ3 more than anything else was the cost - £40 in the mid-eighties for a box set was a lot of money, back then.

True, I remember selling off quite a few other books just to afford it.

The re-issue of slim, hardback and inexpensive books was the approach taken by Games Workshop to make the game more accessible in 1986 - but by then, they'd already began to promote their own WFRP much more heavily anyway.

I am a fan of WFRP, but I am always amused to look at the games from which they obviously stole more than a little to the WFB/WFRP setting, and to which they had a license at one time or another before the release of WFRP.

That said, I do think that the game could do with losing a bit of the complexity of system and ensuring that the art/design direction of the line is better thought out. RQ3 was a very dry read and it did seem a little over-technical. The setting material inside deluxe was actually quite dull too, truth be told. All of these factors can be sorted out by a good professional overhaul, which is what I believe is going to happen this time round.

I totally agree. Sure, it must please old fans, but the old fans are a dying market, so it must also please a new crowd, attract new players who never before has heard the words "RuneQuest" or "Glorantha".

With the d20 bubble waning, I think the re-release of a popular and celebrated, alternative fantasy system is a clever business move on Mongoose's part. The release of some new, stylishly packaged Glorantha material in addition to this is good news for the fans.

It's not only clever, it is the only way to go.
Allowing other game/setting designers to use your system quickly increases the market base in size.

I personally am looking forward to running or creating several settings for such a system.
I would really like to make/play;
> Post-apocalyptic setting (Mad Max 2 / Gamma World).
> Science Fantasy setting (think a cross between evil dead, alien, dune and you got the setting I am working on).
> Dark/High/Mundane etc. Fantasy (working on one, looking forward to convert my Eberron and Midnight campaigns to the RQ system).

 

[GrimJesta]

OK, this made me feel better.

My problem is that I'm what some call a "system-whore". If a new system comes out I have to buy it and get enough of the sourcebooks that it's playable. I'm trying (somewhat successfully) to break myself from this trend so I have to think long and hard about ditching other systems for RQ.

But it's RQ and I loved that game and still love it. One of my fondest gaming memories involves a Head-Hanger: I ran the encounter in a very Lovecraftian way, so it freaked my players out.

-=Grim=-

 

[Jeff Cope]

But it's RQ and I loved that game and still love it.

I hear ya. I feel the same way. It's been forever since I've seen RQ. I played back in the RQ2 days. Dang, I wish I still had that rulebook and all my supplements and Wyrm's Footnotes magazines (with some of Mike "Hellboy" Mignola's earliest published work!). I'll have to track one down on eBay one of these days when I can afford it...

...but, I'm glad RQ is coming back. Not sure if I'll find a group with whom to play the new game, but I'm looking forward to picking up the ruleset.

Jeff

 

[Archer]

OK, this made me feel better.

My problem is that I'm what some call a "system-whore". If a new system comes out I have to buy it and get enough of the sourcebooks that it's playable. I'm trying (somewhat successfully) to break myself from this trend so I have to think long and hard about ditching other systems for RQ.

-=Grim=-

Same here. I am hoping the RQ system will be good enough for me to use for a long time, so that I can ditch a lot of other systems, and use only RQ to run several campaigns and settings designed for other systems (and eventually other settings designed for the RQ system).