Wayfarers = December, Wayfarer = Legend

MongooseMatt

Administrator
Staff member
We have some exciting news for Wayfarer, Wayfarers, and Legend, and have posted the full details on Planet Mongoose;

http://blog.mongoosepublishing.co.uk/

However, to summarise;

Wayfarers RPG
The Wayfarers RPG by Ye Olde Gaming Companye will be released by Mongoose in December this year, likely in the second week. We will be following it up with the first supplement in January, World of Twylos. Look for them in all good game stores.

Legend
Henceforth, the core RuneQuest II rules will be known as Legend. The core book will be available in October, and you can read about the full release schedule, RQII compatibility and licensing opportunities on Planet Mongoose.
 
Much better. I like the new name, although there is still "Legend of the Five Rings" to get confused with... but the name space for roleplaying games is pretty crowded, very hard to avoid clashing with a pre-existing name.
 
You know what would make it even more awesome? getting the licence for David Gemmell's The Drenai Tales since what better system for such a setting than Legend :)
 
Now, Legend I like much better as a name. Has a bit more ring to it, me thinks.

The license thing also sounds promising. It is good to keep it simple and not require acknowledgment of potential partners, though I wonder if it would not benefit the line to at least keep an eye out for quality content. However, I hope there will still be a binding, legal license attached to the game, because if it's just a verbal "do whatever you want", this is great for fan material, but really not an option for a viable business.
 
msprange said:
The Wayfarers RPG by Ye Olde Gaming Companye will be released by Mongoose in December this year, likely in the second week. We will be following it up with the first supplement in January, World of Twylos. Look for them in all good game stores.

LOL, way to go! What better way to avoid confusion than to bring the name into the Mongoose fold. "All your base belong to us"; The new Mongoose motto? :D
 
The bit about publishing any tweaks separately and the assurance that RQII will still be compatible/is-the-same-game is excellent news.

The drop in size and price could be good for sales as well I reckon, although I do like the A4 leather bound books personally.

Good to hear, this sounds very promising. :)
 
Very cool that you are printing and distributing Ye Olde Gaming Companye's Wayfarers game. Also cool that you've decided on Legend instead of Wayfarer. I like the way you've named the books - Monsters of Legend, Arms of Legend, etc.
 
Absolutely stoked for this!!!!!!!

I never got into RQII but am planning on buying the PDFs for it (along with the MRQ1 PDFs I don't have), it will then be a good complement for Legend e.g. if I use Glorantha Second Age for RQII I can always double check page numbers against the PDFs but use Legend to run it.

I alse love digest sized books, the only reason I bought the Traveller LBBs was because of their size :)

Mongoose - just please, please, please put bookmarks in your Legend PDFs!

Also a living campaign wouldn't hurt :)
 
RE tweaking the rules. That's a hard business decision to make;

Tweak the rules and;
i) Run the risk of disenfranchising some RQII owners ("My RQII books are now no good, damned if I'll buy Legend!"), thus loosing some revenue.
ii) Please some others ("Yay they fixed, X, Y and Z, this is better so I'll dump RQII and buy Legend."), and gain some revenue.
iii) Predict if ii) will outweigh i).

Don't tweak the rules and;
i) Please some RQII owners ("Cool, nothing's changed so I can keep my RQII books, no need to buy Legend."), thus loosing some revenue.
ii) Run the risk of disenfranchising some others ("Boo, they had the chance to fix X, Y and Z but wasted the opportunity, no point buying the Legend book."), thus loosing some revenue.
iii) Predict if either or both i) and ii) will be significant enough to bother about.

Of course it's far more grey than this, but simplistically, I suspect not tweaking the rules runs more risk of lost sales than tweaking them.
 
Stainless said:
Of course it's far more grey than this, but simplistically, I suspect not tweaking the rules runs more risk of lost sales than tweaking them.

Also, one mans bug is another mans feature, so you have to be really careful in deciding, what actually needs tweaking...
 
PhilHibbs said:
DigitalMage said:
Also a living campaign wouldn't hurt :)
"Creatures of Legend", "Arms of Legend", and maybe "Living Legend", the name does lend itself to some cool derivatives.
Wonder if we'll get legs of legend and other body parts too.

More pertinently.

Not tweaking the rules (beyond the published errata) all but guarantees that everyone who bought RQII has no need to buy Legend. Some will anyway but lets face it Mongoose need to expand not just recycle.

You can tweak the rules without invalidation. Some examples.

Wraith Recon had a revised description of how the Brawn skill works. Using the Wraith Recon version of Brawn would make sense but doesn't invalidate any other publications. (I suspect that 99% of the readers of this forum don't know how WR changes Brawn or even that it did.)

Say in the sorcery section they created a list of 24 generic grimoires with spell lists then that would be useful tool for new players. Again, such a thing is effectively invisible to RQII players but adds value to Legend.

Say they rewrote the movement and charging rules explanations but didn't change the rules themselves. That would improve the explanation of the rules but again would have no effect on RQII products.

Finally, say they expanded the bestiary to some 30 odd species and included specific cultural backgrounds for the most common PC species then that would still have no effect on RQII but would vastly improve the utility of the book.

Essentially if what they did was a fine tooth-comb editorial pass based on the best part of 2 years of questions, comments and experience what you would end up with is something that is RQII+. That's what I hope they'll do. My decision would then be: ok I don't have to buy it but it's cheap, convenient and would be useful. At that point I would buy it.
 
Back
Top