duncan_disorderly said:
Really? I thought that it was the default position for a RPG as opposed to the "Everything that is not explixitly allowed is forbidden" approach of boardgames. You can't possibly hope to write rules to cover every single situation that might arise in a RPG, and the answer to the question "Can I do <plausible thing> should never be "Sorry, It's not in the rules".
IME, it's the exact opposite. I've always preferred playing to GMing but since I was always the one who bought the rules that duty usually fell on me.
The oldest excuse for players trying to pull the most outrageous crap, going all the way back to OD&D, is saying, "But the rules don't say I can't do that." There are a near infinite number of things the rules don't say you can't do but that's a poor excuse for thinking you can do something.
An rpg, unless it's focused mainly on narration and storytelling which tends to imply a lot of GM Fiat right off the bat, requires rules that are crisp, clean, well-explained, and provide clear examples. RQII does none of these things; not to my satisfaction anyways. When you can't even get your own combat example to match up with your combat rules, that's just sloppy writing. Unfortunately, though I wish them the best with Wayfinders, with the departure of Glorantha and Conan, Mongoose is publishing nothing to hold my rpg interests anymore (for reasons which I won't bother with here, I find RQII to be a medicore system at best and without Glorantha Wayfinders means nothing to me).
I am curious to see what types of boargames they put out and whether they can stay strong in a market that, at least in the US, has been strongly held by FFG, Z-Man Games, Days of Wonder, Mayfair and Rio Grande Games. (As for minis, I need another non-skirmish level minis game like I need a hole in my head; unless it's all you play, that part of the industry has gotten way too expensive).
So, good luck to eveybody while I lurk around waiting for Lone Wolf to finish!
jolt