IMHO RQ Monsters III should have been given the title "RQ Monsters II", and what was published as RQ Monsters II should have been published as "Monsters/Creatures of Glorantha".
IMHO RQ Monsters III should have been given the title "RQ Monsters II", and what was published as RQ Monsters II should have been published as "Monsters/Creatures of Glorantha".
This suggests you think Monsters III will have a more universal bent? Whether this is the case or not I quite like the mixed feel of the books with Gloranthan and other setting beasts all together. All are sources for ideas. It might be helpful to have them tagged or marked in some way so that its clear which setting a beastie belongs to.
One thing I would say though is that nothing makes or breaks a bestiary like its artwork. For me, the absolute apogee at any stage was Lisa Free's work for RQ III. In the MRQ line, Monsters II was an improvement over some of the stuff in the first monsters book which was something of a curate's egg. The nadir for me is the terrible illustration of the Wind Child but it competes for last place with the Cliff Toad and the Newtling.
Despite this whinge however, overall the standard is good. I have a long memory. Dave Dobyski anyone?
So a plea then to the Mongoosers to pay attention to this. Perhaps ask some of the commissioned artists to review previous editions of RuneQuest for inspiration.
IMHO RQ Monsters III should have been given the title "RQ Monsters II", and what was published as RQ Monsters II should have been published as "Monsters/Creatures of Glorantha".
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.