Morbid Curiosity: Question for the Grognards

[Decurio]

Why do people persist in expending so much energy into complaining about a game which I suspect they have interest in playing? If you dislike MRQ that much, then why are you here at all? To paraphrase Nagisawa, if you don't like it, noone is forcing you to play it. Play something else.

RQ 2/3 reprints are available from eBay and/or Moon Design Publications, so plenty of material is available for gaming using just [insert your favorite RQ era here] resources. I'm sure that there are plenty of forums where you may discuss the horrible changes wrought when RQ 3 took out the blade venom rules from RQ 2.

So-why are you here? A sense of masochism? Misplaced entitlement? Wounded self-worth? What?

If you dislike the MRQ ruleset so much, then just use the forthcoming Second Age source material with RQ 2/3 rules. Gosh, that was easy, wasn't it?

 

[atgxtg]

You might just as well ask why are all the people who like the game here then. If they think is is a good game why are they here instead of playing it or writing scenarios for it? Maybe becuase you can't play the game as written becuase the PDF isn't out yet?

Why are you here? To show everybody how cool you are? To be a Mongoose groupie? To be a member of some sort of community?

The knife cuts both ways.

If this forum is going to be a forum of any sort, and not just a spot where you all sit around kissing Mongoose butt, it has to be open and will to accept more than one point of view.

 

[iamtim]

If this forum is going to be a forum of any sort, and not just a spot where you all sit around kissing Mongoose butt, it has to be open and will to accept more than one point of view.

I can *kind of* see the OPs point. Generally, fans of a given game go to the publisher's forum to discuss the given game with other fans. People who don't like the game go to RPGnet and complain about how it sucks there.

Er, unless it's Exalted. All RPGnet LOVES Exalted.

...

(In case anyone is wondering, this post was done completely tongue-in-cheek and should not be taken seriously.)

 

[Decurio]

You might just as well ask why are all the people who like the game here then. If they think is is a good game why are they here instead of playing it or writing scenarios for it? Maybe becuase you can't play the game as written becuase the PDF isn't out yet?

The people who like the game are here because this is a forum dedicated to discussing Mongoose's edition of RQ. I thought that would be obvious.
We start our MRQ campaign next week, thanks. The game plays just fine for us.

Why are you here? To show everybody how cool you are? To be a Mongoose groupie? To be a member of some sort of community?

I'm here because this is the online discussion forum for people interested in Mongoose's edition of RuneQuest. Again, I thought this was obvious. Community membership is a plus-but for people so rabidly opposed to the game, this doesn't make a lot sense.

Let me elaborate: I have owned both first and second edition Exalted. I love the setting, I think its evocative and offers a lot of depth in a narrative sense. But I have serious reservations about the game from a rules mechanics standpoint. I don't like the way the probabilities fall, I don't like the way the core mechanics flow in play, and the charm trees are a nightmare. Ergo, I don't hang out on Exalted forums screaming "this sucks!" over and over again. All that accomplishes is making me look like a petulant child.

I was serious-if you, or anyone else-is that unhappy with MRQ, then why not play RQ2/3 with the copious amount of material thats available? Wouldn't that make more sense? Or are the forums-even the forums of an edition of a game which you clearly don't like-a surrogate for the RQ gaming group which, for whatever reason, you don't have? I really don't understand. Wanting to be a member of an online community of like-minded individuals is understandable, but its debatable if you, by your own admission, even qualify as 'like-minded' since you clearly dislike MRQ?

 

[Melkor]

Personally, I want the game to be better, so my queries and complaints are with the hope that they lead to discussion that will cause the issue to be at the least addressed, or better yet, corrected/larified.

I understand your point though, and a lot of posters seem to have taken a turn to negative town (and not without justification in a lot of instances).

If/when the rules-confusion and mathematical anomolies get cleared up, if there are still folks here bashing MRQ simply for not being RQ2 or RQ3, that's when you'll have to wonder.

 

[andakitty]

I was simply hoping for another game that I would be willing to run without having to change a lot of the rules, and that had a lot of support coming out for it. MRQ is turning out not to be such, there are too many little fiddly bits I am not happy with, and some echoes of D20 that I don't care for (can't complain about the planned support, to be sure). I hope I can find a game so I can try it as a player, though. If I run a game again it will be my modified BRP or Tekumel, GOO or BRP.

 

[Decurio]

I was simply hoping for another game that I would be willing to run without having to change a lot of the rules, and that had a lot of support coming out for it. MRQ is turning out not to be such, there are too many little fiddly bits I am not happy with, and some echoes of D20 that I don't care for (can't complain about the planned support, to be sure). I hope I can find a game so I can try it as a player, though. If I run a game again it will be my modified BRP or Tekumel, GOO or BRP.

Incidentally, GoO's Tekumel is the shit-I was really sorry that GoO went under for that reason; I hope the license is picked up by somebody else!

 

[andakitty]

Hmmm? Did that get censored?

I've been collecting supplemental material for Tekumel ever since I got the GOO rulebook. Love the setting, as much as some of the folks here love Glorantha. It does not have a lot being published for it like Glorantha is apparently about to have, though. I'm jealous, in a way.

 

[atgxtg]

The people who like the game are here because this is a forum dedicated to discussing Mongoose's edition of RQ. I thought that would be obvious.
We start our MRQ campaign next week, thanks. The game plays just fine for us.

Rwally, and how are you handling combat? One roll, for attack two. How are you determining the results on the combat matrix? How about you explain it to us? since the chart doesn't work with Matt's clarification.

Mongoose has already said the chart is in error.

And what about the opposed skill resoultion that reduced your chance of success as your skill goes up thanks to the halving rule?

I guess you just love the game so much you care how it actually works, or if.

If it wasn't for the pole who looked at the rules and compiamned about things, no one would know about the error on the combat matrix and How would that go over with players when they noticed how thier chances of success started to drop as thier skill scores went up?


If you really wanted to talk about the game why don't you do so? All the "grognards" have posted all sorts of ideas for fixing things in the game or discussing how things work, myself included.

Starting a thread like this is just just trying to provoke an argument. I you don't want to hear opposing opinins why are you doing that? If you don't want to hear what the "gorgards" have to say why start a thread like this. If you want to tell someone what to do with themself send a PM.

At least the peole who debate about the game have some sort of point that they are trying to get across about the game. Both sides in the pro/anit MRQ debate have generally posted comments that were in line with the topic. If someone posts a poll to see if we like or don't like MRQ the nay sayers have just as much right to say no as those who say yes.

 

[TRose]

For me, the game not perfect i will agree. But then like many people who be gameing for years that ok with me cause I like to tinker with the rules anyway. I have always like both Glorantha and Runequest and I am just glad it was brought back and hope more people start playing it again so I will support it just for that reason. If Mongoose Runequest falls down chance of Runequest ever comeing back are almost nil.

 

[haargald]

For me, the game not perfect i will agree. But then like many people who be gameing for years that ok with me cause I like to tinker with the rules anyway. I have always like both Glorantha and Runequest and I am just glad it was brought back and hope more people start playing it again so I will support it just for that reason. If Mongoose Runequest falls down chance of Runequest ever comeing back are almost nil.

I agree with you, I am a tinkerer. That is why I am on the boards, to hear others ideas for the game.
However, the negative posters do stick out more, it is just human nature to notice the negative stuff more. I think if the folks that aren't going to play MRQ are going to stick around they should try to offer ideas and fixes for what they don't like in addition to or instead of just saying what they don't like or pointing out something in another system they like better.

 

[atgxtg]

However, the negative posters do stick out more, it is just human nature to notice the negative stuff more. I think if the folks that aren't going to play MRQ are going to stick around they should try to offer ideas and fixes for what they don't like in addition to or instead of just saying what they don't like or pointing out something in another system they like better.

Maybe the negative posters are not sticking out enough! Most of the tinkering ideas posted on the boards have involved the negative posters putting in suggestions and ideas.

 

[Decurio]

The people who like the game are here because this is a forum dedicated to discussing Mongoose's edition of RQ. I thought that would be obvious.
We start our MRQ campaign next week, thanks. The game plays just fine for us.

Rwally, and how are you handling combat? One roll, for attack two. How are you determining the results on the combat matrix? How about you explain it to us? since the chart doesn't work with Matt's clarification.

Mongoose has already said the chart is in error.

And what about the opposed skill resoultion that reduced your chance of success as your skill goes up thanks to the halving rule?

I guess you just love the game so much you care how it actually works, or if.

If it wasn't for the pole who looked at the rules and compiamned about things, no one would know about the error on the combat matrix and How would that go over with players when they noticed how thier chances of success started to drop as thier skill scores went up?


If you really wanted to talk about the game why don't you do so? All the "grognards" have posted all sorts of ideas for fixing things in the game or discussing how things work, myself included.

Starting a thread like this is just just trying to provoke an argument. I you don't want to hear opposing opinins why are you doing that? If you don't want to hear what the "gorgards" have to say why start a thread like this. If you want to tell someone what to do with themself send a PM.

At least the peole who debate about the game have some sort of point that they are trying to get across about the game. Both sides in the pro/anit MRQ debate have generally posted comments that were in line with the topic. If someone posts a poll to see if we like or don't like MRQ the nay sayers have just as much right to say no as those who say yes.

Nope. Im not trying to intentionally provoke an argument. I really don't understand why you would spend so much time and energy on a game that you obviously have little interest in. Much like the example of Exalted I provided earlier: its simply a waste of time for me to spend any amount if time and/or energy on the Exalted boards.

Would it not make sense-for you, me, or any other person in a similiar situation to pursue something that they enjoyed? Wow, Im such an ass for suggesting that a gamer who prefers an older edition of RQ, to actually play it. To reiterate: play something you enjoy! How is that picking a fight?

I have never-ever-had a gaming experience in which a player complained about probability and games theory in the middle of session. Never. Every mathematical model is going to have problems somewhere along the probability curve-which means no game is ever going to be perfect.

Speaking only for myself, I ran test combats as written in the book-not according to the sticky posted by Matt Sprange, which I disagreed with. The combats ran just fine, if you ran them as written in the corebook.

If there is an element of exasperation in my original post, its there for a reason, but perhaps I was a bit harsh. I certainly didn't mean to pick on individuals, even if I was addressing a group.

Before making suggestions on rules fixes, we are a)going to play the game, b)see what corrections Mongoose makes in the forthcoming pdf, c) see what rules get changed in forthcoming sourcebooks. I want to give Mongoose the chance to correct the mistakes. They goofed with the initial Conan corebook, and bent over backwards to make good on that mistake for those of us who purchased the first edition. If I have a Mongoose bias, its because of positive experience with them in the past. They earned it.

Admittedly, I want MRQ to work; RQ has been one of my favorite games since RQ2, and I really want MRQ to be a success. There seemed to be an awful lot of mudslinging in the forum without a lot of constructive criticism-and a lot of it seemed to be along the lines of "its not RQ 2" sour grapes. One gets tired of hearing that over and over and over...

The question still stands: if people are that unhappy with a given iteration of a game, then why not play something that they enjoy? (this is offered as a question to the community as a whole, and is not meant as an attack)

Finally, I never denied the right to an opinion to anyone. Period.

 

[Vadrus]

Nope. Im not trying to intentionally provoke an argument. I really don't understand why you would spend so much time and energy on a game that you obviously have little interest in.

Actually it is generally because we were so looking forward to the game that it's actual implementation has come as a disappointment.

No one appears to have come to the boards looking for MRQ to fail, they have just taken a long look at it and seen the flaws, some of which are pretty major.

Besides you will see these threads repeated on almost any forum following the development of a game based on an existing name. Using an established product name can bring customers it also brings expectations.


Vadrus

 

[bluejay]

Well speaking for myself, I'm used to the attitude of The Atomic Think Tank for Mutants and Masterminds where there tends to be a community spirit to getting the best out of the game. Steve Kenson himself comes on and clarifies questions about the ruleset and suggestions and complaints from the forums are used in future revisions and supplements.

I like RuneQuest as a game but am certainly not desperate to go back to RQ3. I think that MRQ has some great potential but a couple of sticking points which need to be worked through.

Although there is a little bashing going on I think that there is a lot of constructive criticism here or simply even objective observations being made.

Surely the fact that people are sticking around on these boards is because they are waiting for Mongoose to clear up the confusion about these rules.

 

[haargald]

However, the negative posters do stick out more, it is just human nature to notice the negative stuff more. I think if the folks that aren't going to play MRQ are going to stick around they should try to offer ideas and fixes for what they don't like in addition to or instead of just saying what they don't like or pointing out something in another system they like better.

Maybe the negative posters are not sticking out enough! Most of the tinkering ideas posted on the boards have involved the negative posters putting in suggestions and ideas.

I would call it 50/50. Some statements are just plain negative with nothing productive, others include a reference to how something is in a different system, and some have genuine suggestions. To me pointing out how something works in another system isn't really super helpful unless you can show how it would work in MRQ.

 

[homerjsinnott]

A whole lot of stuff

You seem to be thinking in very black and white terms, ie people either love MRP or the hate it.

For me and I suspect a lot of others, this is just not true. It is possible for people (and not unusual) to love and hate a thing at the same time or at least aspects of it. People are here to try to make the game better by complaining or to just have some imput.

It may (or may not) come as a suprise to you that many people with some (read a lot) of gaming experience won't play the game as written, but will play some hybrid houseruled/RQ3/RQ2/BRP system. so they are here to take the bits they like and disregard the rest.

And even if people complain about the system they probabily don't want it to fail because I would mean no more RQ.

These are just a few reasons why people are here are, and even though they may complain, very few will hate the system completely.

 

[wartorn]

Although there is a little bashing going on I think that there is a lot of constructive criticism here or simply even objective observations being made.

Amen. Some of the griping gets out of hand for sure, but we are also trying to find mutually agreeable solutions - and even opportunities to expand on the game.

I would guess that the OP is not a wargamer if he's never had mathematical issues in his games. My group is rabid about probability, mechanics and simulation.