What Happened to Adepts Thread on Magic of Glorantha?

[Rurik]

It was overall positive and the criticisms were not unreasonable or put forward in an offensive way.

Did it get real ugly real fast (it hasn't been that long since I checked) or was it deleted just for being somewhat negative? (Overall it was positive - he just pointed out parts he didn't like).

Are the dark ages returning? Perhaps that yahoo group is not such a bad idea.

 

[Voriof]

I think it was starting to go south... Pity as there was some notes in there I wanted to copy for later reference.

Jeff

 

[atgxtg]

I think it was starting to go south... Pity as there was some notes in there I wanted to copy for later reference.

Jeff

One of my big gripes about the "delete-a-thread" way of doing things is that is opens the door for any troll to kill off a thread that has good ideas or information.

 

[Magistus]

Yeah just deleting the entire thread is never good, delete the offending post, and lock the tread is a better idea.

 

[The King]

I read the thread and found it interesting though I think the crtics on the arts were a bit over the top.

As to the Heroquest being not well explained, well you can't do much in 96 pages, especially with the subject being the Magic iin Glorantha. Thus I would more criticize the fact that the book should have been 160 or 200 pages, like the 2nd age for instance.
Perhaps there will be a specific book on heroquest later.

 

[Adept]

I read the thread and found it interesting though I think the crtics on the arts were a bit over the top.

It's possible. I can't really check what I wrote now Parhaps I place much more importance on good visuals than most people here? It's very disapponting for me to have (what I consider to be) bad art in a full colour hardcover book.

I'm somewhat surprised to see the thread deleated. I did say I'm overall quite pleased with the book, didn't I? I'm glad I bought it, and expect to get a lot of mileage out of the EWF and Godlearner stuff for my 3rd age game.

As to the Heroquest being not well explained, well you can't do much in 96 pages, especially with the subject being the Magic iin Glorantha. Thus I would more criticize the fact that the book should have been 160 or 200 pages, like the 2nd age for instance.
Perhaps there will be a specific book on heroquest later.

I agree on the book length, though I took care not to go there in my post. The people running the site seem rather fed up on hearing about it. I'd have loved to see a more detailed account of Heroquesting by Aaron. Parhaps there is hope for some additional material to come later?

I'd love to see some more rules and explanations on his vision of -questing, and parhaps a detailed example.

 

[Voriof]

I read the thread and found it interesting though I think the crtics on the arts were a bit over the top.

As to the Heroquest being not well explained, well you can't do much in 96 pages, especially with the subject being the Magic iin Glorantha. Thus I would more criticize the fact that the book should have been 160 or 200 pages, like the 2nd age for instance.
Perhaps there will be a specific book on heroquest later.

Something as complex and downright interesting a sHeroquesting demands a book on its own. Certainly some books of myths might be done.

Mmm. Outer Atomic Explorer goodness.

Jeff

 

[atgxtg]

I read the thread and found it interesting though I think the crtics on the arts were a bit over the top.

As to the Heroquest being not well explained, well you can't do much in 96 pages, especially with the subject being the Magic iin Glorantha. Thus I would more criticize the fact that the book should have been 160 or 200 pages, like the 2nd age for instance.
Perhaps there will be a specific book on heroquest later.

Something as complex and downright interesting a sHeroquesting demands a book on its own. Certainly some books of myths might be done.

Mmm. Outer Atomic Explorer goodness.

Jeff

Here Here! A good sourcebook on HeroQuesting with several quests and lots of info on myths would be invaluable. I didn't really get a handle on HeroQuesting until I played King of Dragon Pass. Man oh man, is knowing your myths important!

 

[Rurik]

I liked the section on HeroQuesting overall. Some of the gods got very brief coverage, but I think it did a good job of covering the 'major' pantheons that GL's would be plundering.

It is God Learner Centric, but MoG is essentially a GL and EWF sourcebook, so I don't mind that. Hopefully there will be some Orlanthi takes on heroquesting published (as well as other pantheons) too, but I definately think there is enough to get a GM started from any point of view.

It would have been nice to have at least one quest detailed out though.

 

[homerjsinnott]

The thread hadn't been posted in for a while and had an in-depth discussion on heroquesting, yes?

Would anyone be willing to set up a forum?


I'm bored with this.

 

[Exubae]

Parhaps I place much more importance on good visuals than most people here? It's very disapponting for me to have (what I consider to be) bad art in a full colour hardcover

I know what you mean, for me the internal art sets the tone of the book, but its not that the art in rescent books has been bad... just incorrect or inappropriate as it does not depict cultures of Glorantha or convey the world of Gloratha to any great degree...
Perhaps its down to time... though saying that the art in COGII seemed a lot more consistent.

On the Heroquesting front...
...we could do with an example run through of a Heroquest.

 

[Rurik]

Well I didn't want to quibble about the art, but I have to agree, those two pictures that Adept mentioned in particular, the Inhuman King and Yelmalio, are WAY OFF. They are the two that really jumped out at me.

Not bad art, but nothing like they have ever been portrayed before. Now Yelmalio has been worshipped by different cultures in different places at different time, so maybe his look varies from interpretation to interpretation - but I am reasonably sure he never used a sword over a spear as his weapon of choice.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I agree on the book length, though I took care not to go there in my post. The people running the site seem rather fed up on hearing about it. .

There is a solution of course.... Producing books of a size appropriate to the subject matter in hand rather than trying to adopt a one size fits all policy. Matthew Sprange suggested last year that this might happen if/when Mongoose get there own printing facility this year...

 

[The King]

It's possible. I can't really check what I wrote now Parhaps I place much more importance on good visuals than most people here? It's very disapponting for me to have (what I consider to be) bad art in a full colour hardcover book.

I'm somewhat surprised to see the thread deleated. I did say I'm overall quite pleased with the book, didn't I? I'm glad I bought it, and expect to get a lot of mileage out of the EWF and Godlearner stuff for my 3rd age game.

Yes I was surprised too that it was deleted but it seems the politicy there. The fans of Glorantha are sometimes "a bit" demanding since Avalon Hill made the 3rd edition and I guess they want to avoid flame war before they spread.

As is told in the thread, the art is rather inappropriate in the examples you quote.

 

[The King]

I agree on the book length, though I took care not to go there in my post. The people running the site seem rather fed up on hearing about it. .

There is a solution of course.... Producing books of a size appropriate to the subject matter in hand rather than trying to adopt a one size fits all policy. Matthew Sprange suggested last year that this might happen if/when Mongoose get there own printing facility this year...

Now this would be great.

 

[Voriof]

Yes I was surprised too that it was deleted but it seems the politicy there. The fans of Glorantha are sometimes "a bit" demanding since Avalon Hill made the 3rd edition and I guess they want to avoid flame war before they spread.

As is told in the thread, the art is rather inappropriate in the examples you quote.

Some fans have always been like that. As I said in the past, I firmly keep Rule Nine in mind when reading boards, particularly this one. I disagree with Nick about a few of the other things he hates about Glorantha but this one is spot on.

But I haven't had my coffee so I might be a bit cynical.

Jeff

 

[Adept]

Some fans have always been like that. As I said in the past, I firmly keep Rule Nine in mind when reading boards, particularly this one. I disagree with Nick about a few of the other things he hates about Glorantha but this one is spot on.

But I haven't had my coffee so I might be a bit cynical.

Jeff

Just a bit.
Nick's rant is only slightly over the top. /sarcasm

What is the point of having illustrations in the books if they don't actually illustrate, so much as mislead?

It takes a some money and a bit of effort to get quality art for RPG books, but I think it's well worth the effort. There are very good Glorantha illustrators out there, if one is prepared to go the extra mile and not just order half a dozen illos from the house artists.

And if the latter, one should at least give them proper direction on what they are supposed to portray.

You're not in a terribly constructive mood, are you Jeff...

 

[The King]

Some fans have always been like that. As I said in the past, I firmly keep Rule Nine in mind when reading boards, particularly this one. I disagree with Nick about a few of the other things he hates about Glorantha but this one is spot on.
Jeff

I didn't read it for some times. It seems he updated some.

The problems with too demanding fans is that this provokes a kind of elitism where only the purists can approach (means: understand) the world.

Of course it's always interesting to have some fans who bring their knowledge and smartness (just as Adept pointed it out with the Orlanth hammer being a darkness weapon which didn't came to me but is logical) but if we had a panel of experts as previewers of books-to-be-published, I don't believe we wouldn't see much material.

It would be too bad if such critics would prevent potential interested from buying the books and even some authors to produce further works, leaving again the rest of us with fanzines as canon material which is the real truth of it all (veritas) because even Nick Brooke isn't born with the gloranthan knowledge.

That's why I think it's etter to criticize about the rules (or lack of it) or the smallness of the book (do you think that ducks could just only carry so many 160 pages books?) then about the content purity.

Of course I find it unappropriate to delete a post which wasn't insulting but perhaps have someone tell that's the way we do it (as it was the case with Conan which there also gives ground to critical questions as to what is canon (Howard only or some pastiches included or everything that bears the name Conan on it) or what is not?

More seriousy there is one thing about Glorantha: myth isn't mathematic as the God learners would have it. What is true a day might not be another (i.e. the movements of the planets.). After all, even Cthulhu is still waiting (and dreaming) for the stars to be rights.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Of course I find it unappropriate to delete a post which wasn't insulting

It's pretty much always inappropriate to delete a thread which isn't likely to lead to legal action. The real problem with doing so is that we are left with no clue as to what the problem was, who caused the thread to be deleted, and we have also lost any potentially useful comment or opinion in the thread.

And because we don't know what the boundaries are, we never know when we are likely to overstep them again, and when another thread might vanish.

We also don't know whether Mongoose deleted the thread just because - for example - it criticised the art, or the book size, or the quality of the editing or anything else that might have upset someone. which means even if it's not true, we are given the impression that Mongoose are not prepared to listen to constructive criticsm

 

[Adept]

<snip>
We also don't know whether Mongoose deleted the thread just because - for example - it criticised the art, or the book size, or the quality of the editing or anything else that might have upset someone. which means even if it's not true, we are given the impression that Mongoose are not prepared to listen to constructive criticsm

I would also like to know what caused the thread to be deleated. This feels like we are playing in the sandbox of a problem child, and are at the mercy of it's tantrums. No explanations necessary.

/edit Hmm... that came out a bit harsh. Sorry. I don't mean to be insulting to the staff members. It just doesn't seem like a constructive way to run a forum, and it's really nasty having your words disappear like they never were.