More tolkienesque settings?
- Thread starter Archer
- Start date
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
What is this obsession with Tolkien, I find him overly verbose and tiresome at best!
Howards Conan books, now theres a setting (and one Mongoose already have the rights to)!
What about Moorcock, in MHO his worlds are some of the most exciting for gaming!
Howards Conan books, now theres a setting (and one Mongoose already have the rights to)!
What about Moorcock, in MHO his worlds are some of the most exciting for gaming!
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
Archer said:
Ooh, ooh - who's your favourite Character!
I mean, we all love Elric - but Corum is way cool.
I agree on that level, it would be nice to see a 'base paradigm' as it would be easier to build up custom worlds.
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
Ahh, Hawkmoon - Count Brass was always my favourite 
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
Back on Topic, what do you think they should do.
Have a very 'flat' world (no pun intended) such as the one presented in some 'Basic Roleplaying' texts, or have a new Fantasy World (maybe based on the World from Mighty Armies) for people to adventure upon?
Have a very 'flat' world (no pun intended) such as the one presented in some 'Basic Roleplaying' texts, or have a new Fantasy World (maybe based on the World from Mighty Armies) for people to adventure upon?
I think they should create a very generic fantasy setting, and that any future RQ books that is not specifically for a setting, should be using that one.
As such, if you want a very generic fantasy setting to play in, you have it. You also have a very good foundation to use in order to create your own settings.
This is much harder to do with something like Glorantha.
As such, if you want a very generic fantasy setting to play in, you have it. You also have a very good foundation to use in order to create your own settings.
This is much harder to do with something like Glorantha.
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
Thats fair enough, but I am a die-hard Glorantha fan myself Lol.
I'm sure there would be a market for it though.
I'm sure there would be a market for it though.
Lieutenant Rasczak said:
It does not even have to be a separate setting book. Details of this generic setting can be provided here and there in the generic supplements (which it seems are going to do) for RQ.
Take a look at Players Handbook to D&D and you have a basic idea of how you can present a setting (greyhawk) within a supplement, without it interfering too much with the purpose of the supplement.
Then if you have a very generic fantasy bestiary book etc, it is easy to use these creatures in all the fantasy settings published for RQ and so on.
Tolkien was a great poet, a master of the written word. Howard and Moorcock... maybe not so much. All IMHO, of course. That said, I can understand that some find Tolkien's style boring.Lieutenant Rasczak said:
Interestingly, Howard's (and also Moorcock's) way of writing stories created a much more exciting world to share and to play games in. For me, Reading Tolkien is pure joy; but gaming in in Middle-Earth is a pain.
On-topic, I agree that I'd like to see a more traditional high-fantasy setting for RuneQuest that isn't Glorantha. Elves, dwarves, goblins, Gandalf-style magic... maybe mounted knights, too... yep, that'd be nice.
Just my 2 bronzes...
TrippyHippy
Emperor Mongoose
If the system is going to be OGL then there is nothing stopping anybody from designing their own settings is there?
There are a few big literary titles that I'd like to see adapted to this system, however, and this would include Lord of the Rings and Dune. The trouble is that both are huge licences that would take a lot of negotiation to get the rights. If possible, Stormbringer and Conan would also be good fits, but again there are difficult issues to be dealt with to actually make them.
Personally I'd wait a bit and try out Glorantha as a fresh twist on the typical fantasy genre.
There are a few big literary titles that I'd like to see adapted to this system, however, and this would include Lord of the Rings and Dune. The trouble is that both are huge licences that would take a lot of negotiation to get the rights. If possible, Stormbringer and Conan would also be good fits, but again there are difficult issues to be dealt with to actually make them.
Personally I'd wait a bit and try out Glorantha as a fresh twist on the typical fantasy genre.
I am personally working in a fantasy setting, I would not describe it as exactly the standard fantasy setting ala D&Ds Greyhawk, but it is close. It is inspired by Moorcock, Robert E. Howard, H.P. Lovecraft, D&D, and the Evil Dead movies (and many more sources that I can't name because I do not remember where all my inspiration comes from). It is a dark, but also heroic fantasy setting.
When, and if, I get it done, I am planning to release it for a system that has an OGL. First this was going to be d20, but now I rather do it for RQ. However, so far, I have no information about the RQ OGL, so I can not say for sure that I will use that system.
When, and if, I get it done, I am planning to release it for a system that has an OGL. First this was going to be d20, but now I rather do it for RQ. However, so far, I have no information about the RQ OGL, so I can not say for sure that I will use that system.
Maybe so, but it's the content of my wallet they're after. Note this is a new account on these forums.
I haven't been brought here by the lure of the Open Game Licence, rather I follow the Winds of Urox, the Mighty Storm Bull. :evil:
I've never bought any Mongoose product but I'm ready and able to start spending large amounts on RQ again. I won't be spending any money on any OGL mish mashes. If Mongoose have any idea of their likely customer base then they'll know where to focus their support.
I haven't been brought here by the lure of the Open Game Licence, rather I follow the Winds of Urox, the Mighty Storm Bull. :evil:
I've never bought any Mongoose product but I'm ready and able to start spending large amounts on RQ again. I won't be spending any money on any OGL mish mashes. If Mongoose have any idea of their likely customer base then they'll know where to focus their support.
t-tauri said:
Hehe, a bit stingy, are we? (no offense meant, I realize you are fanboy of Glorantha).
I never meant they should not support Glorantha for RuneQuest, I just wanted a more baseline fantasy setting besides Glorantha and Lankhmar. And since they are using an open game license for the system, I am planning (if I ever get the RQ OGL) to make use of RQ for the settings I have been working on a couple of years, instead of the d20/OGL from WoTC.
Having a baseline fantasy setting is a good thing if you want to expand the possible consumber base for an RQ OGL system, it gives those that develop their own settings to be released for RQ something to compare with, to work from etc.
t-tauri said:
That's the danger. Glorantha has the potential to kill this new release if it isn't de-emphasized early. If the average gamer sees one image of a duck wielding a crossbow or a yellow elf with leaves for hair they'll throw the enitre system onto the great heap of niche and satirical settings, whereupon it will slide down and come to rest beside its dusty old friends Tunnels & Trolls and Aftermath. We may feel the two are inseparable but it doesn't serve Mongoose Publishing to make that so. As distasteful as it may be, MRQ needs dual-wielding dark elves ASAP
