Why I won't be buying MRQ

[RMS]

There will not be any more reaction from me. I'll simply skip his posts. Now that I think about it I am ashamed I rose to the bait.

To be fair, it was a pretty good troll. I'd give it a 6 out of 10 for style and give him a +1 for the academic claim.

What? someone says that he won't be buying a product and gives valid reasons and he's trolling?

I'm the one who called it a troll and I stand by that. A troll is a post attempting to do nothing more that stir up an argument. A really good indicator of this is opening a new account simply to make an inflamatory post. In fact, that's why I initially ignored it. The guy came in from nowhere, wrote something with the obvious intention of stirring up an argument and then faded away as soon as he was caught: classic troll. Also things like claiming to be an academic to support a weak argument are pretty classic signs. Someone who's a strong academic can support their own arguments without resorting to that.

Sorry, but slipping a single valid point into a list of three complaints does not turn a troll into a legitimate complaint. It turns a poor attempt at trolling into a good attempt at trolling.

Don't accuse them of trolling, which is a moderators call.

It if walks like a duck and talks like a duck (quack! ) it's a duck, as the saying goes, or in this case, when every indicator is that it's a troll, it's a troll. I don't need a moderator to tell me what a troll is. I'm pretty confident in my own ability to discern such things by this point.

 

[Adept]

It if walks like a duck and talks like a duck (quack! ) it's a duck, as the saying goes, or in this case, when every indicator is that it's a troll, it's a troll. I don't need a moderator to tell me what a troll is. I'm pretty confident in my own ability to discern such things by this point.

A classic troll, I agree. That's why I didn't respond to it.

Hmm... and now we are sort of falling victim to some weird meta-level trolling. Let's leave this thread to die in peace.

 

[andakitty]

Please! I wouldn't have responded to it if I had been awake.

 

[salazar]

I hold back on replying to personal attacks because I don`t want to cause too much of a fuss, and now I find that my dastardly `fading away` is evidence I am a troll?

The reason for my initial post was to make a point which, I am grateful to see, at least the less vocal minority supports my right to make: as a gamer uncommitted to Mongoose, but interested in RQ (which explains my new account), the previews have dissuaded me from buying the game. (Sincere kudos to Mongoose, by the way, for putting up enough previews to allow me to make up my mind.)

While I admit my points 2 & 3 brought no new thoughts to the table, the first was worth starting a thread over, as it hadn`t been brought up before: the poor editing and verbose language, which brings the game down.

If the subject is taboo in the Mongoose forums, then I was unaware. For my part, I have registered why I cannot justify buying the product line, and as my one opinion is likely to be representative of others (one of the basic tenets of marketing) I hope that may be useful feedback.

good gaming to you,
Salazar

 

[atgxtg]

Hey folks,

As someone whose viewpoint is getting closer and closer to salazar's with each preview that I see, I think that a lot of people arew being a little unfair to him here. If someone doesn't like the game, for any reason, that is thier choice.

I would figure that the long term RQers who spent decades having AD&D shoved down thier throats by other gamers could understand that.

If this os going to be a fiar, and open forum where people can discuss differenet points of view, then we need to allow for people who don't like what they see to speak as much as the people who love everything they see. Otherwise this "form" is just a place for go and worship Mongoose.

 

[Enpeze]

The reason for my initial post was to make a point which, I am grateful to see, at least the less vocal minority supports my right to make: as a gamer uncommitted to Mongoose, but interested in RQ (which explains my new account), the previews have dissuaded me from buying the game. (Sincere kudos to Mongoose, by the way, for putting up enough previews to allow me to make up my mind.)

While I admit my points 2 & 3 brought no new thoughts to the table, the first was worth starting a thread over, as it hadn`t been brought up before: the poor editing and verbose language, which brings the game down.
Salazar

I think you should give Mongoose a chance. For me the most previews are looking quite good at the moment. I for my part am buying rule books because of its content and not because of its writing style. I would wonder if a roleplaying book ever wins the pulitzer price. Your requirements as "academic" are way to high, IMO.

By the way, while English is not my native tongue (as one can guess) I think what I know from the previews is enough to say that I like the clear, simpler writing style more than that of RQ3. (it was difficult and long-windedly to read - in the traditional Avalon Hill wargame style which was always aimed more to accountants and lawyers than adventurers )

 

[salazar]

I think what I know from the previews is enough to say that I like the clear, simpler writing style more than that of RQ3. (it was difficult and long-windedly to read - in the traditional Avalon Hill wargame style which was always aimed more to accountants and lawyers than adventurers )

Fair enough! I disagree with your opinion, but what you are saying is certainly on topic.

For my part, I don't find anything in the RQ3 rules as long-winded as, say, the Introduction page of the MRQ Companion. It drones on and on, not content to refer to "the world" without redundantly referring to "the globe" in the same sentence, and so on and so on, and all this taking up one entire page of the precious 96.

Perhaps those with a first language other than English have different preferences? Perhaps younger gamers prefer more of this "flavour" (-less) text rather than the admittedly dense old-school style? For me, though, more adjectives and more fluff does not equal more gaming goodness.


good gaming to you,
Salazar

 

[Durand Durand]

While Salazar raises some good points about writing style, I think I'll have to reserve judgement until I thumb through the books at the FLGS. For the rule books I don't think anyones quibbles over writing style will stop me buying it, the perception Mongoose is splitting books to make money might. I tend to skim rulebooks looking for crunch, and worry more about our groups playing and GMing styles.

While the style and presentation of the books might make a minor difference in our reading pleasure, a lot of gaming books out there are awful in comparison. It's not like we are trying to force ourselves to read David Eddings or Robert Jordan [I have forced myself to read a book of each author], it just isn't that bad. The most important thing is the playing experience, not the reading one, and your the one responsible for that.

DD

 

[Enpeze]

Perhaps those with a first language other than English have different preferences? Perhaps younger gamers prefer more of this "flavour" (-less) text rather than the admittedly dense old-school style? For me, though, more adjectives and more fluff does not equal more gaming goodness.


good gaming to you,
Salazar

I am not sure if you can say "those with a first language other than English have different preferences". This definition is too broad. I would rather say that it depends rather on a PERSONAL preference of the reader than on the primary language he uses. I know some Austrians which have been very fond of RQ3 because they like its dry style. (they were rather technical oriented people and gearheads)
I didnt like the style very much but I was faszinated from the rules so it was not that big problem for me.

Regarding younger gamers I agree. But success of MRQ depends on the attraction of younger gamers as much as on that of old fans. (like myself) Additionally one of the goals of Mongoose have been to modernize RQ and advance it to the 21st century. And this includes the way the text is written, the artwork is drawn and the rules are streamlined. As far as I can see it, they succeeded in text and artwork. (at least for my personal taste) And rule streamlining? I will know this in some weeks.

 

[Urox]

Was RQIV ever published? Because, if not, (and ignoring RQ Slayers) isn't MRQ sorta RQIV by default?

When I hear of RQIV, I think of the aborted RuneQuest: Adventures in Glorantha project.

That's why I prefer MQ (especially since they are pushing the OGL where I don't expect to see any runes).

 

[wargamer66]

Thanks for the heads up Salazar, it didnt occur to me that I should be checking to see if the writing is up to snuff.

It is interesting how dissenting opinions are welcomed around here. You get attacked and then called a troll, basically (im looking at you Andakitty)

Anyway, I will likely buy the Glorantha sourcebooks if the RQ stuff is not watered down too much because of the OGL. I am already worried that the game will be too generic because of that.

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

The reason for my initial post was to make a point which, I am grateful to see, at least the less vocal minority supports my right to make: as a gamer uncommitted to Mongoose, but interested in RQ (which explains my new account), the previews have dissuaded me from buying the game. (Sincere kudos to Mongoose, by the way, for putting up enough previews to allow me to make up my mind.)

Something to bear in mind is that RuneQuest is not written by one person. Maybe you don't like one writer's language, tone, hairstyle or trousers - but bear in mind that in a game line which will feature dozens and dozens and dozens of books, only a handful will be written by that one guy or gal you're not keen on. The others will be written by lots of other writers, with varying tones and styles that you might love or loathe on completely different grounds.

This is something a lot of gamers kinda gloss over, at times. When people complain that D&D is written in plain and dull text? Well, Ravenloft and Eberron sure aren't, even if the three D&D corebooks are. A game line is not one person's writing. The writing of an entire game line is not that one person's writing.

In other game lines I've collected, whether voraciously or casually, some writers have rubbed me the right way and others have ground my gears. I think it's probably shrewd to expect RuneQuest to do the same for people, too. If I'd bailed on the entire game line because of the tone of a couple of books, I'd never own DragonLance, Forgotten Realms, Eberron or Ravenloft, because the first D&D books were so flat to read.

I'm not saying the first RQ books will be like that, but for those who do have complaints, I don't think it's unfair to ask for just a touch of perspective.

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

It is interesting how dissenting opinions are welcomed around here. You get attacked and then called a troll, basically (im looking at you Andakitty)

Look, there's really no need for this naming and blaming now. It's commonly known that people registering on internet forums purely to sling mud at the company/product/other users are trolls. Trolls of this variety sling their mud, then leave or get banned. With a post count of 1 and immediately being openly derisive, it looked like Slalzar was a troll.

Now that it's clear he's just a normal user with critical opinions and didn't register purely to sling dirt and vanish into the ether, no-one is saying he's a troll anymore and no-one is treating his dissenting opinion as childish annoyance the way they would if he were actually a troll.

So, y'know, ease up on the high horse, man. He looked like a troll. Now it's clear he's not. The end.

 

[Urox]

Now that it's clear he's just a normal user with critical opinions and didn't register purely to sling dirt and vanish into the ether, no-one is saying he's a troll anymore and no-one is treating his dissenting opinion as childish annoyance the way they would if he were actually a troll.

Let's not forget that while not as bad*, Fanboy's (fanbois) can also be quite annoying.

* unless they start replying to every critical post with 'I like pie', in which case they are as bad as trolls.

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

No-one is disputing that, but it has no bearing on the situation, either. There's no fanboyism and no trolling going on, so let's all ease up on the accusations, suggested, implied or outright pointed.

 

[Urox]

Hey Clown,

Out of curiosity, are speaking as an official Mongoose represtative/board admin?

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

Hey Clown,

Out of curiosity, are speaking as an official Mongoose represtative/board admin?

No, as a guy who is seeing some pretty petty snark and trying to calm things down.

Does it matter? Does my otherwise completely neutral and polite call for a little niceness have less value?

 

[atgxtg]

Hey Clown,

Out of curiosity, are speaking as an official Mongoose represtative/board admin?

No, as a guy who is seeing some pretty petty snark and trying to calm things down.

Does it matter? Does my otherwise completely neutral and polite call for a little niceness have less value?

No, but it probably has less of a intimidation factor. The old you get more with a kind word and a 30mm autocannon than you do with just a kind word.

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

There are cups of tea more intimidating than me.

 

[GbajiTheDeceiver]

There are cups of tea more intimidating than me.

Like this one: http://www.rider.edu/suler/zenstory/teacombat.html