RuneQuest 6

[RosenMcStern]

2. Thou shalt not re-publish the HeroQuest rules as they are, nor present slight variations as though they were the HeroQuest rules. Your own rules are not HeroQuest rules, though, so you can include them.

This. Done. With written, explicit Moon Design approval. So it can be done.

We just put a big "Alternate" in boldface at the top of the rules page.

As for competition, both economics and evolutionary science will tell you that "Competition is good".

 

[PhilHibbs]

2. Thou shalt not re-publish the HeroQuest rules as they are, nor present slight variations as though they were the HeroQuest rules. Your own rules are not HeroQuest rules, though, so you can include them.

This. Done. With written, explicit Moon Design approval. So it can be done.

It's one thing to say "Sure, you can do it, loads of publishers have", but as an outsider looking at the HQGWL and the products out there, all I can conclude is that the rules are being bent. The reasonable conclusion to draw is that either Moon Design are not enforcing the rules, or that there is some other hurdle to jump through, possibly another fee to pay, in order to negotiate an extension to the restrictions in the basic licence. As I said, from a risk-assessment point of view this puts a question mark in the equation. You can persuade me that you are correct, but you can't persuade me that that's not a badly misleading clause. I've had this with the Fan Policy as well, as have others.

 

[RosenMcStern]

This is a point for Lawstaff to clarify. And, as the license is being rewritten to fit RuneQuest, it is a very good time to do it.

 

[Newtus]

It's one thing to say "Sure, you can do it, loads of publishers have", but as an outsider looking at the HQGWL and the products out there, all I can conclude is that the rules are being bent. The reasonable conclusion to draw is that either Moon Design are not enforcing the rules, or that there is some other hurdle to jump through, possibly another fee to pay, in order to negotiate an extension to the restrictions in the basic licence. As I said, from a risk-assessment point of view this puts a question mark in the equation. You can persuade me that you are correct, but you can't persuade me that that's not a badly misleading clause. I've had this with the Fan Policy as well, as have others.

Unfortunatly both the Fan Policy and the HQ Gateway licence do include some pretty severe legalise that can sometimes be incomprehensible to the layman - because they are legal documents that were created to protect Issaries INCs and Moon Designs intellectual property.

This is why you should always check with Jeff Richard of Moon Design if you ever have any reasonable doubts about the Fan Policy or the HQ Gateway Licence.

I've been doing this all the way for the last three years, since I started publishing Hearts in Glorantha, and its always been a clear and straight forward.

I'm pointing this potiential serious RQ6 or HQ Gateway publishers, be they fan or commerical, who might be reading this thread. Armchair critics will continue to paddle up the river wrong way on this one

Oh and to be totally clear THERE IS NO HIDDEN FEE IN THE HQ GATEWAY LICENSE.

 

[master of reality]

The RQ6 core rulebook will specifically not have Glorantha in it, so that people with no interest in Glorantha don't have to buy pages they don't want (my favourite bit of the announcement). It will still have CMs and hit locations, but sounds like it will also have more new stuff as well as fixing errata.

Wow, so how is it going to be different than MRQ2/Legend then?
Surely both companies can see it would be stupid to have 2 virtually identical systems marketing against each other?

This is what Pete Nash wrote on the Design Mechanism forum. I hope Pete doesn't mind being quoted.

What will you get out of RQ6? Basically we'll be replacing all the stuff we had to cut out of MRQ2, incorporating some slight modifications/additions to address a few issues which have come to light since its release, and producing books with a different attitude towards editing, art and layout.

Whilst the rules will be roughly compatible with MRQ2/Legend, our supplements and settings will be completely original. So there's nothing stopping you from purchasing material from both lines.

If you liked our previous work then hopefully you'll love what we can do when we have personal control over the entire publication process.

 

[Newtus]

Ah yes the Design Mechanism's forum. One last thing on the whole RQ6 Gateway license issue, if you have any questions about it you are best asking there.

http://www.thedesignmechanism.com/forum.php

 

[RosenMcStern]

I have opened a thread about the license issues on the Design Mechanism forums. Maybe it is more respectful if we do not discuss the details of other companies' policies on the Mongoose Forums. I suppose Pete and Loz will continue to post rules clarifications here, but it could become embarrassing for them to talk about legal and licensing issues here. Let's continue this debate there, then.

Edit: grr, Newt beat me again!

 

[medievaladventures]

I'm pointing this potiential serious RQ6 or HQ Gateway publishers, be they fan or commerical, who might be reading this thread. Armchair critics will continue to paddle up the river wrong way on this one

What the license states and what the licensor lets you get away with aren't the same. Like Rosen states, if what they meant is less restrictive, then they should incorporate the changes to the license to make that clear. Otherwise any licensee not adhering to the license without written permission from the licensor is taking a risk of a contract dispute ending in court. Betting on someone being nice and allowing it is not sound from a legal risk assessment.

 

[medievaladventures]

I have opened a thread about the license issues on the Design Mechanism forums. Maybe it is more respectful if we do not discuss the details of other companies' policies on the Mongoose Forums. I suppose Pete and Loz will continue to post rules clarifications here, but it could become embarrassing for them to talk about legal and licensing issues here. Let's continue this debate there, then.

Edit: grr, Newt beat me again!

To be fair, my talking about it here was in re: to what license Legend will use. I'm hoping that they go OGL or creative commons.

 

[PhilHibbs]

I'm pointing this potiential serious RQ6 or HQ Gateway publishers, be they fan or commerical, who might be reading this thread. Armchair critics will continue to paddle up the river wrong way on this one

As a self-confessed armchair critic, I would say in my defence that exploring and pointing out the confusing clauses from my comfy armchair is providing the very catalyst for salty dogs like yourself to point out the reality. "The function of genius is not to provide new answers, but to ask new questions, that time and mediocrity can resolve."

 

[soltakss]

Speaking from the POV of someone more coming from playing the RQ via Stormbringer/Elric over the years rather than specifically RQ/Glorantha, it looks quite confusing.

Yes, it is confusing, if you think of each version as separate games.

However, if you have a free and easy view of rules, then all the versions become part of some inter-compatible super game that has many different options that can be used.

That is how I view them.

So, I would use things from Deus Vult (Legend) in Merrie England (BRP) and things from RQ6 in Legend and things from Celestial Empire/Dragon Lines in RQ6 Kralorela.

Surely both companies can see it would be stupid to have 2 virtually identical systems marketing against each other?

That's what will happen.

It gives each company control over which products can/can't be used with their product and allows them to produce their own product ranges without worrying whether the licence agreement is going to be pulled.

 

[danskmacabre]

This is what Pete Nash wrote on the Design Mechanism forum. I hope Pete doesn't mind being quoted.

What will you get out of RQ6? Basically we'll be replacing all the stuff we had to cut out of MRQ2, incorporating some slight modifications/additions to address a few issues which have come to light since its release, and producing books with a different attitude towards editing, art and layout.

Whilst the rules will be roughly compatible with MRQ2/Legend, our supplements and settings will be completely original. So there's nothing stopping you from purchasing material from both lines.

If you liked our previous work then hopefully you'll love what we can do when we have personal control over the entire publication process.

Looking at this from Mongoose's POV:

The main developers of MRQ2/Elric etc are not with Mogoose anymore.
They are now working for another company making a virtually identical RPG, except it will have the bugs removed and clarified better.
They have the license for Glorantha and are making RQ6 which will work WITH Glorantha however the core rules don't have Gloranthan content.
Really Design Mechanism hold all the cards for RQ.

Mongoose are stuck with a system (MRQ2/Legend whatever) and don't have the core developers for it and their competitors DO have them and are developing a new version of RQ based on their rules (that Mongoose paid people to develop), so have the talent and brand recognition as an advantage over Mongoose.

I bet Mongoose will drop MRQ2/Legend or already have.
I think attached RPGs such as Elric etc that run under it will be dropped too or already have been.
I hope Design Mechanism will buy the Elric and other settings licenses, as if they don't those settings are dead in the water.
In past announcements Mongoose inferred they were moving their focus away from Fantasy RPGs, I think they're completely dropping their interest in it.
I'd be amazed if Legend (or any associated new material for settings) ever sees the light of day from Mongoose.

 

[danskmacabre]

Surely both companies can see it would be stupid to have 2 virtually identical systems marketing against each other?

That's what will happen.

It gives each company control over which products can/can't be used with their product and allows them to produce their own product ranges without worrying whether the licence agreement is going to be pulled.

If I were a new customer to RQ and checked out the history of the various editions of RQ, there's no way I'd buy Legend over RQ6 knowing that Legend would no longer be developed by the developers of MRQ 1 or 2.
As a customer I wouldn't buy a system that was NEARLY identical, I'd want one or the other, I can't be bothered converting stuff if I don't have to.
And again as a new customer, I would easliy choose the branded and further developed RQ6 over Legend, which is essentialy a reprint, warts and all.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

This is what Pete Nash wrote on the Design Mechanism forum. I hope Pete doesn't mind being quoted.

What will you get out of RQ6? Basically we'll be replacing all the stuff we had to cut out of MRQ2, incorporating some slight modifications/additions to address a few issues which have come to light since its release, and producing books with a different attitude towards editing, art and layout.

Whilst the rules will be roughly compatible with MRQ2/Legend, our supplements and settings will be completely original. So there's nothing stopping you from purchasing material from both lines.

If you liked our previous work then hopefully you'll love what we can do when we have personal control over the entire publication process.

No problem, MoR

 

[Deleriad]

My understanding is that RQ6 looks to be the most generic RQ yet. I suspect that because they also have the licence for Glorantha that people are misreading the announcement as one for a new Gloranthan RQ.

Indeed the first announcements are for purely generic products or mythic Earth products with licensed settings (Glorantha and Gwenthia) coming later.

Personally I think it's a great thing to have Loz and Pete still back in the saddle with RuneQuest while Legend also produces a route for people to publish d100 supplements. The more creativity and work in the area the more likely it is to lure people into trying it and that has to be good. Between RQ6, OpenQuest, Legend and BRP there is likely to be a system and publication route that can span a really wide range of products and offer something for everyone.

 

[Nickbergquist]

I'll just pony up for Legend and RQ6 both as they are released/re-released. It's the only way to be supportive on both fronts, and if I get both then I can hedge my bets toward whichever edition ends up lasting the longest anyway. I have a sneaking suspicion that the RQ6 book is going to be a collectible and high quality product at the very least, one of those "look what I have" tomes that I can drag out for showing around the table. Meanwhile Legend will offer up the inexpensive and functional tomes that we crease and fold as we play. Or something like that.

For a RQ/BRP fanatic this is a good time. Thankfully this is one game system where cross-compatibility is a whole lot easier to manage. It could always be worse....just look at what D&D has fractured into for contrast!

 

[danskmacabre]

It could always be worse....just look at what D&D has fractured into for contrast!

The market that's available for DnD games is huge in comparison to the available market for any RQ game.
But really there's only 2 serious contenders for DnD, DnD 4th ed and Pathfinder.
Most of that is brand recognition, but also they really support their products well, both DnD 4th ed and Pathfinder have lots of software support, especially DnD 4th ed.

I know there's loads of clones out there of DnD, but in the RPG market they're niche products.

 

[DamonJynx]

Mongoose, I think, will forge ahead with Legend. Here's why;

• 1. They have the EC license. I'm sure they won't "drop" it unless they have already recovered their cost for the license on sales of the currently published product (MRQ1&2 Versions).
  2. Age of Treason, Deus Vult, Clockwork & Chivalry are games that I believe Mongoose will continue to support through Legend as long as the games and supplements continue to sell. From what I've seen on the forums, I don't think this will be an issue.
  3. Competition is good. Yes, Legend and RQ6 will be similar, in much the same way the MRQ1&2 are similar and share basic mechanics with BRP. I can't speak for Openquest as I haven't read or used that product (sorry Newt), but all these D100 games are loosely compatible.

I don't think it will matter in the long run. Most GM's will take bit's and pieces from each of the game systems that suit their game. Have a look at Da Bosses post regarding his Elric system! It's a complete mish-mash (I mean that in a nice way) of various iterations of Stormbringer and RQ - but it works for him and that's what's important!

 

[danskmacabre]

I hope I'm wrong and will happily stand corrected as I really want to see Elric (and the other games) still supported.

Time will tell I guess.

 

[DamonJynx]

I hope I'm wrong and will happily stand corrected as I really want to see Elric (and the other games) still supported.

One way or another I think they will be. I'm sure Simulcrum and the guys responsible for Clockwork & Chilvary will continue to produce material, whether that's published by Mongoose or someone else...

The EC line if Mongoose let it drop or whatever would probably be picked by Loz and Pete I reckon.