TheRPGSite

The recent RQ:AiG kerfuffle got me thinking, and I've seen quite a few RQ fans here and at the Design Mechanism forums voicing an opinion similar to my own.

Being a relative newcomer to, and fan of, both Runequest and Glorantha (albeit a very casual fan of Glorantha — there's just too much canon to absorb), I feel Glorantha, with its Campbellian metaphysics, elaborate mythologies, built-in storied metaplot (the Hero Wars) and a worldbuilding that all too oftens treads the thin line between gonzo and goofy (Ducks being a prime example; yes, I know they're actually grim fatalistic death-cultist warriors but the question of why do they have to be anthro fucking ducks cannot be, um, ducked), can be a hard sell to a gaming group; a d to be honest I have often wondered if Glorantha's upfront weirdness may have driven a significant contingent of fans away from Runequest.

I think MRQII struck a very neat balance, with minimal references to Glorantha in the core rules, not entirely unlike MongTrav handled the even more dominant Third Imperium setting. When RQ6 rolled out, to be honest, I did miss these references, but the ersatz-Heroic Age Greece of the examples is apparently a hit with the RQ6 fanbase (I was actually kind of hoping for a less filed-off, RQ3-like "Mythic Earth" take on things).

But I have the impression that, historically, Chaosium always presented Runequest as "the RPG set in Glorantha" which, intentionally or not, may have downplayed its perception as an excellent ruleset for all sorts of settings. I feel RQ6, like RQ3 before it, may have captured a wider market outside established fandom, at least in part, on account of dropping Glorantha. I could be wrong and either way my opinion will have no bearing on decisions already made, but I am curious as to what my fellow posters think.

So here's a little poll, just to indulge my curiosity. Should Runequest be marketed as a toolbox, or as the game set in Glorantha that you can also use to run X or Y? Feel free to respond to the thread and elaborate, everyone.

I liked the 2nd edition of RQ- had the one with the red ink cover.  Anyway, it was slim version of the rules with just a little info on Glorantha- just right.  

Plumbing the depths of a game world doesn't float my boat.

I voted for the first option, but really would like to see RuneQuest/Glorantha combined into a single book and also to see RuneQuest as a standalone generic system not tied to Glorantha.

We effectively have the second, as both Legend and whatever RQ6 is going to be called are effectively RuneQuest without the name, both standalone systems and both producing supplements based on Alternate/Mythic Earth and other settings.

I still own a copy of RQ2 that is in pretty good condition. Back in the day, I didn't mind the references to Glorantha -- and I thought that RQ's take on elves, dwarves, ogres, etc., was pretty cool.  But I only played RQ a little bit, before focusing on other games, including other BRP games (CoC, Hawkmoon, etc.).

It was MRQII -- and specifically the Elric setting -- that brought me back to the game 5 years ago. With RQ6, I've participated in Mythic Britain and Luther Arkwright games.  Zero Glorantha.

I have nothing against Glorantha, but I have no interest in it myself. I would never run a campaign in it.  So I much prefer keeping the system and setting separate.

Quote from: soltakss;867496...
We effectively have the second, as both Legend and whatever RQ6 is going to be called are effectively RuneQuest without the name, both standalone systems and both producing supplements based on Alternate/Mythic Earth and other settings.

Is Legend still being supported by Mongoose?  

I haven't noticed anything from them since they decided to discontinue the Elric line, but I also haven't been paying attention.

Quote from: Akrasia;867499Is Legend still being supported by Mongoose?  

I haven't noticed anything from them since they decided to discontinue the Elric line, but I also haven't been paying attention.

There's some support. They have Deus Vult and a line of setting and thematic supplements to Legend proper.

Voted +RQ:-GL, as I really don't have any interest in the Glorantha setting at all, and wish RQ would stop trying to re-couple itself with the setting. But considering I already have a few RQ books, it has no impact on me.

What a can of worms did you open with this poll.

A Dune-sized one, I suspect.

Not sure some of your assumptions are correct, for one, Call of Cthulhu was a game Chaosium based on RQ2 and had huge success, so much so it eclipsed RuneQuest that I'm sure most CoC players have no idea about its origin. The difference with RQ6 is that I think it is the first successful version of RuneQuest which doesn't use Glorantha as a setting. RQ3 was an attempt that never really worked, RQ6 does stand on its own without Glorantha.

I like Glorantha and have never had a problem with its supposedly goofy elements, D&D is chock to the brim with mountains of goof and no one bats an eyelid, but one or two elements in Glorantha seem odd and the same people who love D&D gonzo go into a paroxysm of consternation. That said, the quality of RQ6 and The Design Mechanism is so high that I'm no longer that bothered about Glorantha, and looking forward to what's next for The Game Formerly Known as RQ6.

The goofy elements in Glorantha didn't bug me... I just never connected with it for some reason. I think back in the day I was much more interested in Asian fantasy and the generally wilder stuff presented by D&D. So really, I just wanted the rules.
The Glorantha in RQ2 didn't get in the way much more than the sample setting bits in Magic World or RQ6 do... but I'd just as soon this new one be free of Glorantha.

Having backed the GtG, it is an impressive physical product, but I'm not really sure what to do with it. Moreover, while the themes of mythology and religion are interesting, real world mythology and history is more interesting to me. For me, Greg Stafford's creative work on Pendragon is better than Glorantha - which is a 'second wave' fantasy setting (after Tolkien's 1st wave in effect) with a long history, but still essentially 'just another fantasy setting', regardless.

Having backed RQ6, I'm irritated that they were forced to spend two years developing Adventures in Glorantha at the expense of other titles (Mythic Greece was put on hold while they wrote it). Now this is effectively being canned to make way for a new edition of the game, in an attempt to airbrush away the last few years and take creative control of the game.

The system development of Call of Cthulhu 7E was poor, in my opinion, and Heroquest is an interesting system but a poor fit for the gritty verisimilitude that was the trademark of the original RuneQuest/Glorantha. I've no idea what RuneQuest 7 (and I refuse to call it anything else now) will turn out like.

BRP is my favorite system. Call of Cthulhu, Stormbringer, BGB and then RQ6 which is pretty much a benchmark. I'm ..meh on Glorantha. It is a neat setting and I've lifted plenty from it, but it doesn't really sing to me.

It is frustrating to see RQ6 killed off, even if that means freeing TDM to do what they want. I would rather have seen the triumvirate work together, with diverse sourcebooks backing up the RQ6-core.
But then again, I don't have to juggle trademarks, bottom lines, publishing companies and rabid fans, so maybe Chaosium made the right move.
All I know is that I'll still buy TDM's products, and probably a bit of Chaosium's as well. But not RQ4/7 - because I really don't need Glorantha in my d100's.

I feel a bit the same. I got into RuneQuest with RQ3 and I immediately saw that it was perfect for my OWN fantasy worlds. The Glorantha material in that was in a separate booklet and I always found, and still find, Glorantha kind of fascinating but not somewhere I want to run a game in. Glorantha is a bit of a weird uncle you meet at family parties who tells good tales, but you're not sure you'd ever actually hang out with him on purpose ... I respect that there is a big Glorantha fandom but they seem to me to be a bit obsessive on details of this mythology that is infinitely complex. I'd rather make my own. I'm a little sad that the Design Mechanism game is losing the name, which I like, but I guess there were always two RuneQuests : the one that was tied to Glorantha and the one that was a toolkit. I like the Mythic settings and I've loved DM's settings and supplements so far. I think they can count on me as a continued customer in the future, but Chaosium, I can't help but feel, have somewhat screwed them over. All that work! Keeping the flag flying for RuneQuest, and with a fantastic system! At least they get to keep the system. But I feel like this move is a bit of a "duck" you to all of us who have been RuneQuest fans for years but not necessarily Glorantha fans. Well, I guess we have a new banner to rally under, whatever it's called!

Quote from: markfitz;867529I respect that there is a big Glorantha fandom but they seem to me to be a bit obsessive on details of this mythology that is infinitely complex.

This is a huge obstacle for quite a few games out there- Harn, Glorantha, probably Tuekemel.  In my older years, with less time to play, I tend not to give a rat's ass about game world depth.  I wish I remember where I read it, but someone wrote about playing in Glorantha as "killing stuff and taking their clacks" and that sounded fun to me- the rest?  Not so much.

I chose the "love RuneQuest, don't care about Glorantha" option.

My first RuneQuest was the Spanish translation of the British version (in two books, Basic and Advanced). I fell immediately in love with its system, and how logical and internally consistent it felt.

I can't bring myself to like Glorantha. It is too loony for my tastes.

I voted to have both in a single book, a la Chaosium's first two editions -- which even with the two Cults books bound in would be pretty compact by today's standards.The core book alone was only 128 pages, and mostly you learned about Glorantha as you learned about the equipment, magic and monsters.

I think there's even less demand today than there was a quarter century ago for yet another "generic fantasy" rules set. D&D / Pathfinder seems to have that well sewn up. There may be a Big Purple segment that switches rules sets every few weeks, but they probably want a context along with that too. (I'd guess they're more into 'narrativist' things designed for short runs anyhow.)

I also chose the "Love RuneQuest, don't care about Glorantha." option. I'm new to the game, still reading RQ6 but have never read any Glorantha products. I like how instead of picking a class the player chooses a culture the PC comes from and builds the skills in layers. It seems a bit more realistic in terms of character development while allowing for a wide variety of character types. Seems easy to tweak and adjust to suit your tastes (want 50 points in a hobby? Go ahead! Want Nomads to have Sorcery? Go ahead! Want only the cultists of the Fire Lord to have Fireball spells? Go ahead!)

I'm getting itchy to run a campaign. Not sure if I have the time to do it though.

I'm not sure what distinguished Runequest as a system from a hundred other fantasy systems other than the distinctive Glorantha setting.

Quote from: yosemitemike;867579I'm not sure what distinguished Runequest as a system from a hundred other fantasy systems other than the distinctive Glorantha setting.

Then why on earth are you even posting in this thread?

Quote from: yosemitemike;867579I'm not sure what distinguished Runequest as a system from a hundred other fantasy systems other than the distinctive Glorantha setting.

Yes, I think you'll find that the reason why so many systems are similar to RQ is that it was a seminal influence on them.

Quote from: Bilharzia;867580Then why on earth are you even posting in this thread?

Same reason anyone ever posts in any thread.

Quote from: yosemitemike;867584Same reason anyone ever posts in any thread.

'Ignorant and bored' is actually not the reason most of us post.

In order to have an opinion about whether I am interested in Runequest without Glorantha, I need some sense of what this means other than a generic fantasy system.  

Quote from: Bren;867606'Ignorant and bored' is actually not the reason most of us post.

Carrying butthurt from an unrelated thread isn't either.

Am I ignorant about Runequest?  Yeah, I am.  If I already knew about it. I wouldn't need to wonder.

So are you going to say anything relevant or just be pissy and childish?

I really like Glorantha and have since I first played White Bear and Red Moon -- well before Runequest was even thought of, let alone available. It's one of the few published settings I really like.

Interesting to see the general +Runequest -Glorantha trend. Maybe it's a theRPGsite thing?

Quote from: RosenMcStern;867511What a can of worms did you open with this poll.

A Dune-sized one, I suspect.

To be honest, I expected far worse.

Quote from: Bilharzia;867514RQ3 was an attempt that never really worked,

How so?

Quote from: Bilharzia;867514I like Glorantha and have never had a problem with its supposedly goofy elements, D&D is chock to the brim with mountains of goof and no one bats an eyelid, but one or two elements in Glorantha seem odd and the same people who love D&D gonzo go into a paroxysm of consternation.

Too true! There's one in particular I expect to swing by and threadcrap, any time now...

Quote from: TrippyHippy;867581

Quote from: yosemitemike;867579I'm not sure what distinguished Runequest as a system from a hundred other fantasy systems other than the distinctive Glorantha setting.

Yes, I think you'll find that the reason why so many systems are similar to RQ is that it was a seminal influence on them.

I'm not 100% sure Runequest 1e was the first non-class-and-level, skill-based roleplaying game — I believe Traveller may hold that distinction — but RQ certainly played a huge role in divulging the concept, playing as it were a respectable, if distant, #2 to D&D's vastly dominant #1 in the 1970s.

Quote from: yosemitemike;867608Am I ignorant about Runequest?  Yeah, I am.  If I already knew about it. I wouldn't need to wonder.

Rather than popping into a poll thread where you know jack shit about the topic, why don't you start your own thread asking to be educated? That way people who want to take a break from teaching pigs to sing can pop in and try to teach you about Runequest.

Quote from: The Butcher;867620Interesting to see the general +Runequest -Glorantha trend. Maybe it's a theRPGsite thing?

I think it's interesting that there's a lot of people who like Runequest but don't care for Glorantha, but also a healthy constituency of people who dig both.

If you like Runequest and aren't fussy about what a system calls itself - and really, who really gets themselves het up about that? - there's ample people willing to cater to you. You have Mongoose with Legend, you have Design Mechanism with The Game Formerly Known As RQ6, you have OpenQuest, you have this forthcoming Revolution D100, and so on and so forth. Thanks to Mongoose putting their first RQ out under an OGL, there will more or less always be someone willing to sell you a variation of Runequest. They'll all vary somewhat, of course, but that's fine - that just means there'll be some variants which work great for you and some that you don't get on with, that's how competition works in creative fields.

However, Glorantha isn't put out under an OGL. If you want Glorantha, you have to go to Chaosium and their licensees these days, because they're the ones with the rights.

On the face of it, the poll result seems to suggest that Chaosium is making an error by marrying Runequest to Glorantha, because they're going for a stack of (at the time of writing) some 10 people who like them both married up (and, arguably, 5 people who like both RQ and Glorantha but think strategically it's better for the two to be separate) and setting aside the pile of 19 people who like RQ but don't care for Glorantha.

However, if you look at it this way you miss the point that there's a whole swathe of different companies competing for the attention of those who like the system but don't care for the setting, but Chaosium are the only players in the game who are in a position to cater to those who like them both mixed in with each other. So Chaosium get to walk away with 10-15 customers in their pocket whilst a bunch of different publishers squabble over the audience who want a Runequest-like system but don't want Glorantha as a setting - with any particular publisher being lucky to walk away with 5-8 of the pile of 19.

Quote from: RandallS;867615I really like Glorantha and have since I first played White Bear and Red Moon -- well before Runequest was even thought of, let alone available. It's one of the few published settings I really like.

I seldom hear WBRM or Nomand Gods mentioned. Those games were one of the initial selling points for Runequest for me. The fact that the rules were a remarkable example of clarity in explanation and design for that or really any time, easily confirmed the sale.

Quote from: Warthur;867626However, Glorantha isn't put out under an OGL. If you want Glorantha, you have to go to Chaosium and their licensees these days, because they're the ones with the rights.

That's an interesting point.

For decades I was a dedicated Chaosium customer, but at this point I have all the CoC scenarios and background information I need for the rest of my lifespan (though I have a niggling desire to pick up Horror on the Orient Express, in part just because my wife really likes the historical Orient Express and likes CoC). I have most of the RQ1, 2, and 3 Glorantha information published and personally I didn't like HeroWars/HeroQuest system and have zero interest in buying material designed for it. Additionally, the move away from tying the setting into the system (and vice versa) is a trend I really dislike. Setting info tied to a useful rules system (which I assume something RQ2 based  would end up being) is probably the only way that Chaosium is likely to get any more of my money at this point in time.

Quote from: Bren;867625Rather than popping et cetera

So, cross thread drama it is then.  Well, if that's what floats your boat.  Maybe I can make a new thread so that you can go there and complain that I am making an entire new thread OMG just to ask something that has already been asked before.

or, you know, I could just participate in the thread that is already here and ignore what you want.  I will go with that.  You are pissy and looking for something to bitch about and you will find it no matter what I do so there's no point in giving a shit what you want.

So, more or less on topic, I have always thought of Runequest and Glorantha as being more or less synonomous with Runequest being a bespoke system for playing in Glorantha.  The voting here strongly suggests that this view was not correct.  This is the first time I have seen them strongly disconnected from each other.

Quote from: Bilharzia;867514RQ3 was an attempt that never really worked,

Quote from: The Butcher;867620How so?

RQ3 as a rules system didn't fully or successfully tear itself away from the context of Glorantha, (I have to say I still liked it, and preferred it generally to RQ2) it tried to half-heartedly but it didn't introduce much that was much of an improvement to RQ2 and at the same time it did add a number of things that worked poorly - like the fatigue rules or the new sorcery system. Coupled with this it was published by Avalon Hill which massively jacked the price up and lowered production standards...this didn't help with it's uptake by the existing audience and pretty much killed it for a new one. This is why the intervention of Loz & Pete with Mongoose RQ and then RQ6 was a bit of a miracle, because (after all this time) they both innovated on the existing rules and with RQ6 created something strong enough to stand without Glorantha as a setting.

Quote from: Bren;867628Setting info tied to a useful rules system (which I assume something RQ2 based  would end up being) is probably the only way that Chaosium is likely to get any more of my money at this point in time.

Well, you are in luck, because based on the FAQ (http://www.chaosium.com/blog/some-qa-about-whats-happening-with-runequest/) Chaosium posted about this it seems like that is exactly what they intend to offer:

QuoteAn important design goal for us is that the rules system needs to be integrated with the setting and should reinforce and reward the player's interaction with the setting. And the setting for RuneQuest is Glorantha!

Quote from: yosemitemike;867632You are pissy and looking for something to bitch about and you will find it no matter what I do so there's no point in giving a shit what you want.

That's pretty funny coming from a pissy, whiny little bitch like you, cupcake.

QuoteThis is the first time I have seen them strongly disconnected from each other.

Given that you don't know jack shit about Runequest or Glorantha, your ignorance of the connections and lack there of between the two is hardly surprising. The publication of Runequest 3 in 1984 created a clear separation between Runequest as a system and Glorantha as a setting and that separation has continued until last week. So as news flashes go, this one has been dead and dusted for decades. A quick Internet search would easily have shown you that, but you've already established that doing your own homework isn't your M.O.

Quote from: Bren;867647That's pretty funny coming from a pissy, whiny little bitch like you, cupcake.

Yup, cross thread drama.

Quote from: Bren;867647Given that you don't know jack shit blah blah blah

and pointless pissiness.  How much spam are you going to add to this thread just because you are pissy about an unrelated thread?

Has anyone read or played the 13th Age Glorantha?  I had wondered if 13th Age would have been a better match for Glorantha than RuneQuest.

We played the hell out of RQ2 for years, but by the early 90s, I switched out to Stormbringer 3e because I preferred the looser, faster system and I loved Moorcock's doomed setting.

Over the years, I've played a bit of RQ2 with other groups and discovered how wildly different the actual canon of Glorantha is compared to what we gleaned from the RQ2 books.

Sadly, what I learned about the "real" Glorantha didn't do much for me.

Quote from: Bren;867628(though I have a niggling desire to pick up Horror on the Orient Express, in part just because my wife really likes the historical Orient Express and likes CoC)

I've both played and run Orient Express and I highly recommend it. I had lots of fun with it years ago.

Quote from: The Butcher;867620I'm not 100% sure Runequest 1e was the first non-class-and-level, skill-based roleplaying game — I believe Traveller may hold that distinction — but RQ certainly played a huge role in divulging the concept, playing as it were a respectable, if distant, #2 to D&D's vastly dominant #1 in the 1970s.

One also has to take into account the influence of RQ/BRP in European game design (which was a lot more profound than in the US), with notable titles such as WFRP, Drakar och Demoner and Aquelarre, and indeed the influence of RuneQuest on later designs of D&D (especially 3rd, via Jonathon Tweet) and the World of Darkness as a setting (via Mark Rein Hagen). And of course, don't forget that the whole BRP bandwagon (including Call of Cthulhu, et al) followed on from RQ.

In the case of Traveller, I think they were both developed independent of each other but came up with different ways of incorporating similar ideas. I regard both as equally influential, albeit in different spheres of later gaming design. Traveller's influence can be seen more in games like GURPS and Cyberpunk.

This thread is kinda like opening Pandora's Box...:eek:

Voted "Love Runequest, don't care about Glorantha", but I really meant "Love Runequest, Glorantha can take a flying leap".

Goofy and the Ducks don't particularly bother me.  I loathe Campbell/Monomyth/Hero's Journey and canned metaplot, regardless of what setting may be at hand and I get the distinct impression that they're the creamy filling within Glorantha's hard outer shell of Narrativium (which I'm also less-than-fond of).

Quote from: Phillip;867541I think there's even less demand today than there was a quarter century ago for yet another "generic fantasy" rules set. D&D / Pathfinder seems to have that well sewn up.

And what of those who want to play fantasy in homebrew settings without slotting everything into classes, levels, and system-enforced "zero-to-hero" (or, depending on edition, "hero-to-superhero")?

Quote from: Bren;867627I seldom hear WBRM or Nomand Gods mentioned. Those games were one of the initial selling points for Runequest for me.

I suspect most people did not see WBRM until the Avalon Hill edition (long after RQ was published) and most have never heard of Nomad Gods.

Side Note: I have all three editions of WBRM. The first edition with nothing but runes on the counters, the second with less confusing counters (with normal counter illos, much more playable for me as I didn't spend so much time trying to remember what each counter was), and the AH edition. I prefer either Chaosium edition to the much cleaned up AH edition.

As someone who came to BRP via the Games Workshop versions of CoC and Stormbringer, I don't have much emotional attachment to RuneQuest. I love the logical simplicity of the core BRP system but I was not a fan of the RQ Magic systems which were, for me, over complicated (particularly RQ3 sorcery). I much preferred the simpler systems in CoC and Elric!

As for Glorantha, I didn't have much interest in it until the late 80s when Tales of the Reaching Moon ignited my interest. King of Sartar confirmed me as a fan.

Anyway, that's why I voted for Glorantha not RQ.

Quote from: Spinachcat;867667Has anyone read or played the 13th Age Glorantha?  I had wondered if 13th Age would have been a better match for Glorantha than RuneQuest.

I think the approach nowadays is to take whichever system you prefer and use it. So, HeroQuest, RuneQuest, 13th Age, all do Glorantha reasonably well and all can scratch particular itches.

Quote from: Spinachcat;867667Over the years, I've played a bit of RQ2 with other groups and discovered how wildly different the actual canon of Glorantha is compared to what we gleaned from the RQ2 books.

Sadly, what I learned about the "real" Glorantha didn't do much for me.

RQ2 had a lot of information based on sections of sourcebooks - Rulebook. Cults of Prax, Cults of Terror, Trollpack, RuneQuest Companion, Pavis, Big Rubble, Borderlands, Griffin Mountain and Snakepipe Hollow. The other supplements had a bit about Glorantha, but not much.

This knowledge has been expanded upon over a number of supplements and sourcebooks, the latest being the Guide to Glorantha. It has been revisited and expanded, occasionally changed, but the core nature of Glorantha has not changed appreciably.

The difference, I think, is that RQ2 had it built in as part of the game and the game came with a lot of atmosphere. Many of the RQ2 books simply dripped setting and that flavour has been lost, to a certain extent, in later books.

Quote from: nDervish;867722Voted "Love Runequest, don't care about Glorantha", but I really meant "Love Runequest, Glorantha can take a flying leap".

Goofy and the Ducks don't particularly bother me.  I loathe Campbell/Monomyth/Hero's Journey and canned metaplot, regardless of what setting may be at hand and I get the distinct impression that they're the creamy filling within Glorantha's hard outer shell of Narrativium (which I'm also less-than-fond of).

The Hero's Journey and other Cambellian fillips are useful for Heroquesting, which historically has fallen somewhere between only minimally present and entirely nonexistent in the majority of Runequest games. Runequest wasn't designed to emulate the Regiment killing power of Glorathan Heroes and their entourages, much less the fearsome ability of Harrek the Berserk.

Because of the more gritty focus of Runequest, the metaplot is easy to ignore or keep in the distant background if the PCs aren't great Heroes. It is no more a problem than knowing how WWII ended would be a problem for the players in a campaign designed to emulate the TV show Combat! or Band of Brothers. Unless you are running characters who expect to punch Hitler in the face to end WWII, the really big picture of the war's outcome is setting not something an infantry squad of PCs is supposed to change single handed.

If I was going to run a campaign where the players are Heroes on the order of Argrath, the Red Emperor, and the pals of Harrek the Berserk and Jar Eel the Razoress I'd jettison the details of the metaplot and focus on the conflict in the Dragon Pass letting the players take on the roles of the great Heroes. If I was going to run that sort of a campaign. I'm not sure that Runequest will be able to handle that level of power. It hasn't been able to in the past.

Quote from: soltakss;867763The difference, I think, is that RQ2 had it built in as part of the game and the game came with a lot of atmosphere. Many of the RQ2 books simply dripped setting and that flavour has been lost, to a certain extent, in later books.

I agree.

I voted for liking both, but wanting separate books.

The poll is a general question, but I think that the answer is influenced by current circumstances. While RQ6 isn't on the level of Pathfinder for popularity, it has a good following and a steady release of high-quality supplements that support multiple settings.

It feels like the current Chaosium crew is simply out of touch with what is going in the current gaming scene. They march in, grab the license back and announce that they are picking up where RQ3 left off. The seemed to forget that during all the years between, plenty of people have continued playing RQ and are more invested in what is happening with it now than what happened 20 years ago.

They never really seemed to consider that pulling the license of RQ6 and making a Glorantha-only book was going to make large part of the RQ fanbase very unhappy.

Even for Glorantha fans, we already had a Adventures in Glorantha on the way. It would already be out by now if Chaosium hadn't stepped in, so even some Glorantha fans resent the intrusion. They are waiting on a new edition, and while Moon Design does nice work, they take their time doing it. I'll be surprised if it shows up in 2016.

My point is that there is probably an unusually high bias against a Glorantha-specific RQ book because Chaosium has done it in a way that makes it feel like a threat to a great deal of RQ players.

If they had let TDM continue to print their RQ6 books with logo intact while also coming out with a Glorantha-specific core book, gamers would be a lot more welcoming of it.

When you add in how they managed to completely alienate the BGB/MW fans as well, they are cutting off a lot of potential customers. That said, I think their version of RQ will sell to enough people to make it worth while. They've just managed to divide the fanbase more than they needed to.

Quote from: Baulderstone;867778I voted for liking both, but wanting separate books.

The poll is a general question, but I think that the answer is influenced by current circumstances. While RQ6 isn't on the level of Pathfinder for popularity, it has a good following and a steady release of high-quality supplements that support multiple settings.

It feels like the current Chaosium crew is simply out of touch with what is going in the current gaming scene. They march in, grab the license back and announce that they are picking up where RQ3 left off. The seemed to forget that during all the years between, plenty of people have continued playing RQ and are more invested in what is happening with it now than what happened 20 years ago.

They never really seemed to consider that pulling the license of RQ6 and making a Glorantha-only book was going to make large part of the RQ fanbase very unhappy.

Even for Glorantha fans, we already had a Adventures in Glorantha on the way. It would already be out by now if Chaosium hadn't stepped in, so even some Glorantha fans resent the intrusion. They are waiting on a new edition, and while Moon Design does nice work, they take their time doing it. I'll be surprised if it shows up in 2016.

My point is that there is probably an unusually high bias against a Glorantha-specific RQ book because Chaosium has done it in a way that makes it feel like a threat to a great deal of RQ players.

If they had let TDM continue to print their RQ6 books with logo intact while also coming out with a Glorantha-specific core book, gamers would be a lot more welcoming of it.

When you add in how they managed to completely alienate the BGB/MW fans as well, they are cutting off a lot of potential customers. That said, I think their version of RQ will sell to enough people to make it worth while. They've just managed to divide the fanbase more than they needed to.

Actually all pretty compelling points (especially given that I am a BGB/MW fan and have no interest in Glorantha).

Quote from: Baulderstone;867778...
It feels like the current Chaosium crew is simply out of touch with what is going in the current gaming scene.  
...
Even for Glorantha fans, we already had a Adventures in Glorantha on the way. It would already be out by now if Chaosium hadn't stepped in...
...
When you add in how they managed to completely alienate the BGB/MW fans as well, they are cutting off a lot of potential customers.  
...
They've just managed to divide the fanbase more than they needed to.

Good points!

Quote from: Baulderstone;867778It feels like the current Chaosium crew is simply out of touch with what is going in the current gaming scene. They march in, grab the license back and announce that they are picking up where RQ3 left off. The seemed to forget that during all the years between, plenty of people have continued playing RQ and are more invested in what is happening with it now than what happened 20 years ago.

Quite right. For me, personally, it was the later editions of RQ - especially RQ6 - that actually brought Glorantha to my attention. Not the other way round. I had prior BRP experience with Stormbringer and Call of Cthulhu, but it was the notion of having a generic and versatile ruleset for fantasy that was the drawcard.

The interest in Glorantha as the original setting interested insofar that I went ahead and backed the Guide to Glorantha kickstarter, but I've still yet to work out what I can actually do with it. The Adventures in Glorantha supplement would have answered that question, but it's been a couple of years in the making and now I'm being asked to buy into another new rulebook and game.

Moreover, whatever the strengths of Glorantha, I still find more appeal from real world mythic sources. Pete just outlined that we shall soon see a Mythic Greece and updated Rome book coming out. These titles are more exciting to me, but it would have been nice to have a game system that could support both.

Quote from: nDervish;867722Voted "Love Runequest, don't care about Glorantha", but I really meant "Love Runequest, Glorantha can take a flying leap".

Goofy and the Ducks don't particularly bother me.  I loathe Campbell/Monomyth/Hero's Journey and canned metaplot, regardless of what setting may be at hand and I get the distinct impression that they're the creamy filling within Glorantha's hard outer shell of Narrativium (which I'm also less-than-fond of).

I never felt governed by a metaplot. I think that impacts one adventure (River of Cradles), and the impact is "the Lunars are coming! You handle port, we've got starboard". In the materials I have, it seemed like there was more informing about what happened in Greg's campaign than detailing what had to be.

And, there's as much Narrativium as there is adventuring in Greyhawk with D&D. Heroquesting is a bear of a different color, I grant.

I'm just realizing, however, that I am talking about 30+ year old experiences. My point of view is probably variant.

Nevermind. :)

I chose want a RQ book, but not with Glorantha.

It's not that I have anything against it, in fact, I've never read one of the setting books ever, so I have no opinion on whether or not it's good, it's just that I prefer to create my own setting.  Have for the past 30 some years.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;867830I've never read one of the setting books ever

The two best introductions to Glorantha out there, as far as I can tell, are the amazing Prince of Sartar webcomic (http://www.princeofsartar.com/) and the addictive, classic text-based RPG/wargame, King of Dragon Pass (http://store.steampowered.com/app/352220/).

Yes no Glorantha.

Another option in this poll would be RuneQuest with Mythic Earth setting incorporated into the main rulebook.  Endless possibilities: prehistoric mythic Ertebølle/mythic Doggerland, mythic North America, mythic Aztec, mythic Egypt, mythic Rome/Greece, mythic Celts, mythic Dark Ages, mythic Vikings, mythic Medieval.

The main rulebook could just contain snipets or choose one period/location; I do think RPGs benefit from having a tied setting - even if playable without that setting. Especially so if it is something adaptable to many other RPG settings/worlds which a Mythic Earth setting would be.

Quote from: Akrasia;867499Is Legend still being supported by Mongoose?  

I haven't noticed anything from them since they decided to discontinue the Elric line, but I also haven't been paying attention.

Supposedly they have a half dozen books written, but waiting on layout (http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=116212&sid=e266e5f4a6a47606eb8d27d303da20d3). However, they won't even tell us what the content of any of them are about.

Quote from: camazotz;867782Actually all pretty compelling points (especially given that I am a BGB/MW fan and have no interest in Glorantha).

Same here. They seem to have dropped the stuff I was invested in and are pushing stuff I'm not... and doing it in a somewhat kludgy manner.

So I'll turn a squeaky wheel but keep my eye on the cool stuff TDM has on the way.

To add some more to my last post, I think it undersells RQ6 to describe it as a system without a setting. It's true, it doesn't have a setting, but it is rich toolkit for making a setting. You have the various cultures that PCs come from. It provides you with rules for creating cults, guilds and brotherhoods. The game provides many options for magic.

In addition to deciding which magic systems to include, you have options on how magic points are gained. Is it just a matter of getting a good nights sleep? Do you need to draw magic points from special sites that cults war over? Or do you steal them from others through human sacrifice? Or some combination of the above.

The options it presents get my mind racing about the kind of settings I can use it with. While some toolboxes can be dry, it is a very flavorful toolbox that encourages you to play with it. Even if you don't want to make your own setting, the supplements from TDM all put the elements from the core book together in different ways. Playing in Thennla, Monster Island or Mythic Britain are all very different experiences. This is a big part of the appeal for RQ6 for a much of the fanbase.

With their decision to kill the RQ6 corebook and replace it with a Glorantha-specific one, Chaosium was scaling back what would could be done with the game. The fact that Chaosium didn't seem to understand this showed how they didn't bother to get a sense of what was going in with RQ now.

It's funny, as I am usually in favor of games having a built-in setting, if only to provide an example. RQ6 is just a special case where it's lack of a specific setting actually enhances it.

Quote from: ptingler;867854Supposedly they have a half dozen books written, but waiting on layout (http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=116212&sid=e266e5f4a6a47606eb8d27d303da20d3). However, they won't even tell us what the content of any of them are about.

Ha ha, same old Mongoose.  

Boy do I not miss them.

Quote from: Baulderstone;867877To add some more to my last post, I think it undersells RQ6 to describe it as a system without a setting. It's true, it doesn't have a setting, but it is rich toolkit for making a setting. You have the various cultures that PCs come from. It provides you with rules for creating cults, guilds and brotherhoods. The game provides many options for magic.

In addition to deciding which magic systems to include, you have options on how magic points are gained. Is it just a matter of getting a good nights sleep? Do you need to draw magic points from special sites that cults war over? Or do you steal them from others through human sacrifice? Or some combination of the above.

Snip

Baulderstone, totally agree with this as well as your earlier points about the new plan. RuneQuest 6 is a very special beast, one that really gets your creative juices flowing. I challenge anyone to read the magic chapters, as you say, and NOT be overcome with the urge to design a whole magic ecology, dials turned every which way to create your vision of a fantasy world. That, along with the culture-specific character creation that begs for characters that are part of a history and a specific world, and the combat system with just the right amount of blood and guts ...

Well, as a world-builder, I don't know a better toolkit for creating worlds. It's not just that you CAN , but the options available are really inspiring, for everything from Mythic Ancient World Heroes to gritty medieval grunge, to classic Swords and Sorcery or dark Faery tale ....

I'm actually glad now that Loz and Pete will continue mining the rich vein of the Mythic Earth supplements and the other goodies they have planned without being tied to Glorantha.

+1 for Baulderstone. I too agree with your two posts. I respect Chaosium for what it has done over the decades. However Runequest 6 really is an excellent set of rules that gets my creative juices flowing. If the guys at Chaosium want to pare it down and reattach their Glorantha stuff... well, I think that's a bad decision.

Well, you're in luck because that's no longer going to happen.

Quote from: The Butcher;867839The two best introductions to Glorantha out there, as far as I can tell, are the amazing Prince of Sartar webcomic (http://www.princeofsartar.com/) and the addictive, classic text-based RPG/wargame, King of Dragon Pass (http://store.steampowered.com/app/352220/).

I'm sure the setting is great, I'm just not interested.

For some reason, neither Pendragon nor Runequest ever really made it onto my radar in my first 20 years of roleplaying.

Pendragon suddenly jumped out at me a bit over a year ago, and that eventually led me to reading up a little bit on Glorantha, and from there to Runequest.

I decided a while ago that I wanted to run Glorantha using Runequest, and picked up RQ6 on pdf, with plans to get the hard copy when RQG comes out next year.

The sudden, recent announcement was initially disappointing, because I like what I saw of RQ6, am not convinced the new RQ2 based RQG will make me as happy, and I'm not interested in doing more heavy conversion than I have to.

After a while, though, I started looking at what else TDM has released for RQ6, and found Thennla/Age of Treason. Which is much more accessible than Glorantha, and a lot more appealing to me in general.

Which is a long-winded way of saying I've come to the realisation that I quite like RQ and Glorantha being kept separate.

I voted  other, btw, because I have no history whatsoever with either the rules or the setting, and am not in a position to have developed especially strong feelings about either.

I like Glorantha, but have no interest in running it with RQ.
RQ/BRP was my first love when it comes to RPGs, but that being said, I think 13th Age might in the end be a better fit for that complex setting. Same goes for Tekumel by the way. And I'm not even that huge a fan of 13th Age, but the Icon system lends itself pretty well to worlds rich in lore and makes it easy to get into immediately.

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;868062I like Glorantha, but have no interest in running it with RQ.
RQ/BRP was my first love when it comes to RPGs, but that being said, I think 13th Age might in the end be a better fit for that complex setting. Same goes for Tekumel by the way. And I'm not even that huge a fan of 13th Age, but the Icon system lends itself pretty well to worlds rich in lore and makes it easy to get into immediately.

I'm not so sure that's true. I don't know how much of it will remain in RQ:G but the combinations of cultural background, Devotion, cult initiation, Passions, and Runic Affinity that you can rustle up in RQ6 seem to me to do a lot of what the Icons do, but in a more detailed manner. Or do you mean the Icons system is good precisely because it's simple?

RuneQuest was always the best system for Glorantha, in my opinion, because it's deliberate gritty, simulationism lent the setting more verisimilitude and brio. It makes the world seem more historical and real.

In my view, right or wrong, the reason why Jeff and co decided to go 'back to source' for the new RQ rules was more a practical case that they couldn't find a way to compromise and condense down the RQ6 rulebook (c.400 pages) + Adventures in Glorantha (c.200 pages) into a circa.300 page core rulebook. They basically want a book to match Heroquest: Glorantha in design, I reckon, under their total creative control and I think on final analysis it must have been an editing nightmare.

Anyway, we now know that there will never be a unified BRP/RQ system (a la D20/OGL) only a 'family of related games' and this is merely how it has been anyway over the last decade or so. I'd like to see less 'core rules' for disparate versions of the same essential system and language, and more standalone settings with all necessary rules included. This ought to cut out more consternation in the future.

Anyway, travelling over Christmas so best wishes to all!

Quote from: nDervish;867722Voted "Love Runequest, don't care about Glorantha", but I really meant "Love Runequest, Glorantha can take a flying leap".

Goofy and the Ducks don't particularly bother me.  I loathe Campbell/Monomyth/Hero's Journey and canned metaplot, regardless of what setting may be at hand and I get the distinct impression that they're the creamy filling within Glorantha's hard outer shell of Narrativium (which I'm also less-than-fond of).



And what of those who want to play fantasy in homebrew settings without slotting everything into classes, levels, and system-enforced "zero-to-hero" (or, depending on edition, "hero-to-superhero")?

You can always go for GURPS if you must have something utterly denatured, no there there, that reads like a theoretical textbook. Or Hero System. For that matter, there's the BRP "big gold book".

RQ works fine, though, and I don't see how having the distinctive features of questing for runes, etc., included in the package for the rest of the audience is some kind of great hindrance. It's hard to see how such a belligerent attitude could be sensibly formed on the basis of Chaosium's RQ2, which was my referent. (The AH edition was similar, sketching Glorantha as well as Fantasy Europe.)

As I wrote, it was not a big deal, just bits of color such as descriptions of elves and dragons, a couple of inspirational maps by Bill Church (from WB&RM and Nomad Gods), and a brief big-picture overview.

One might as well complain that Villains & Vigilantes or Champions was useless for making up your own campaign from scratch because of write-ups of CHESS and UNTIL (and contemporary-era assumptions generally). Likewise of course, only more so, Marvel Super Heroes. Traveller? Gamma World? Darned near every successful game ever? Too bad they had flavor, instead of being just technical algorithms with no context, so they couldn't be such huge sellers as the hundreds of "some guy's numbers" booklets published, eh?

Guilds, spells, cults, monsters, economic and cultural assumptions, etc., necessarily imply some background, in D&D as well as in Palladium or Harn or RQ. Having that helps people get their beatings and get started, even without having already spent years or decades building a campaign world. Having some color that's not just another imitation of Greyhawk seems to me a feature.

Quote from: nDervish;867722Voted "Love Runequest, don't care about Glorantha", but I really meant "Love Runequest, Glorantha can take a flying leap".

Goofy and the Ducks don't particularly bother me.  I loathe Campbell/Monomyth/Hero's Journey and canned metaplot, regardless of what setting may be at hand and I get the distinct impression that they're the creamy filling within Glorantha's hard outer shell of Narrativium (which I'm also less-than-fond of).



And what of those who want to play fantasy in homebrew settings without slotting everything into classes, levels, and system-enforced "zero-to-hero" (or, depending on edition, "hero-to-superhero")?

You can always go for the Big Gold Book, or GURPS or Hero System, if you must have something utterly denatured, no there there, that reads like a theoretical textbook.

RQ works fine, though, and I don't see how having the distinctive features of questing for runes, etc., included in the package for the rest of the audience is some kind of great hindrance. It's hard to see how such a belligerent attitude could be sensibly formed on the basis of Chaosium's RQ2, which was my referent. (The AH edition was similar, sketching Glorantha as well as Fantasy Europe.)

As I wrote, it was not a big deal, just bits of color such as descriptions of elves and dragons, a couple of inspirational maps by Bill Church (from WB&RM and Nomad Gods), and a brief big-picture overview.

One might as well complain that Villains & Vigilantes or Champions was useless for making up your own campaign from scratch because of write-ups of CHESS and UNTIL (and contemporary-era assumptions generally). Likewise of course, only more so, Marvel Super Heroes. Traveller? Gamma World? Darned near every successful game ever? Too bad they had flavor, instead of being just technical algorithms with no context, so they couldn't be such huge sellers as the hundreds of "some guy's numbers" booklets published, eh?

Guilds, spells, cults, monsters, economic and cultural assumptions, etc., necessarily imply some background, in D&D as well as in Palladium or Harn or RQ. Having a context helps people get their bearings and get started, especially those who have not already spent years building their own game worlds. Having some color that's not just another imitation of Greyhawk seems to me a feature.

Quote from: Phillip;868174Guilds, spells, cults, monsters, economic and cultural assumptions, etc., necessarily imply some background, in D&D as well as in Palladium or Harn or RQ. Having a context helps people get their bearings and get started, especially those who have not already spent years building their own game worlds. Having some color that's not just another imitation of Greyhawk seems to me a feature.

I agree, though what you said sounded strangely familiar. ;)

Yes, some weirdness happened while editing and I ended up with two posts. Just deleted the first.

Maybe my view is not hip to the current scene, and vanilla "fixed up D&D" is not a glutted market as it was in the '80s and '90s.

One those "almosts" of history was Avalon Hill's plan to use Jack Vance's Lyonesse as setting for RQ IV (which came to a strange and tragic end).

Quote from: Bilharzia;867666Check out RQ Essentials.

Thank you Bilharzia!! And your photo rocks.

Wow! RQ Essentials is quite a read. I can see why RQ6 has a following. I could see me years ago getting really into a dynamic system like RQ 6, but these days its got a level of complexity that doesn't draw me.

But hot damn, that's one fine fantasy toolkit.

Quote from: RandallS;867726I suspect most people did not see WBRM until the Avalon Hill edition (long after RQ was published) and most have never heard of Nomad Gods.

I am surprised Chaosium hasn't teamed up with Fantasy Flight to produce modern versions of White Bear, Red Moon and Nomad Gods.

Quote from: The Butcher;867839The two best introductions to Glorantha out there, as far as I can tell, are the amazing Prince of Sartar webcomic (http://www.princeofsartar.com/) and the addictive, classic text-based RPG/wargame, King of Dragon Pass (http://store.steampowered.com/app/352220/).

Thank you Butcher!!!

I am loving Prince of Sartar. Deeply impressed. Woot!

Quote from: Phillip;868174One might as well complain that Villains & Vigilantes or Champions was useless for making up your own campaign from scratch because of write-ups of CHESS and UNTIL (and contemporary-era assumptions generally). Likewise of course, only more so, Marvel Super Heroes. Traveller? Gamma World? Darned near every successful game ever? Too bad they had flavor, instead of being just technical algorithms with no context, so they couldn't be such huge sellers as the hundreds of "some guy's numbers" booklets published, eh?

I'm guessing you haven't actually read RQ6. Unlike RQ 2, it's built to cover a wide range of fantasy settings. It's also got a lot of flavor, both in its writing style and in the many examples of play.

Quote from: Baulderstone;868209I'm guessing you haven't actually read RQ6. Unlike RQ 2, it's built to cover a wide range of fantasy settings. It's also got a lot of flavor, both in its writing style and in the many examples of play.

I don't need to read them all to learn that the core book has 456 pages, more than 3.5 times as many as RQ2. I don't know whether they watered down Dwarves and Elves and Trolls to generic D&D copies. I don't know whether they dumped Dragonewts and Broos and Morokanths, Spirilt Binding Crystals and Rune Lords and Chaotic Creature Features.

I do know that it seems mighty strange that the inclusion of touches like that plus a few evocative pages mentioning such things as the Lunar Empire's clash with Sartar, Shadows Dance and Snakepipe Hollow, the Big Rubble and the River of Cradles and the Riders of Prax, should pose an onerous burden when they did not when they made up such a smaller proportion.

I gamed in Glorantha fairly regularly until the advent of RQ3. Then it disappeared of the radar for a few years and I happily adapted RQ2 and, later, RQ3 to a vast multitude of different settings. Then in the 90s the "RuneQuest Renaissance" brought Glorantha back with a level of complexity that I wasn't willing to buy into, never mind new players who had no background in it at all. I haven't had any desire to play or run Glorantha games since, but I still like the RQ2 and RQ3 iterations of the rules.

Quote from: Spinachcat;868206Wow! RQ Essentials is quite a read. I can see why RQ6 has a following. I could see me years ago getting really into a dynamic system like RQ 6, but these days its got a level of complexity that doesn't draw me.

Join us, Spinachcat. You know you want to...

Quote from: Spinachcat;868206Thank you Butcher!!!

I am loving Prince of Sartar. Deeply impressed. Woot!

Always glad to be of service. :) I do believe presenting the complex myth and exotic local color as a serialized webcomic was a master stroke.

Quote from: Phillip;868217I do know that it seems mighty strange that the inclusion of touches like that plus a few evocative pages mentioning such things as the Lunar Empire's clash with Sartar, Shadows Dance and Snakepipe Hollow, the Big Rubble and the River of Cradles and the Riders of Prax, should pose an onerous burden when they did not when they made up such a smaller proportion.

I think that the "few evocative pages" married to the RQ 6 system was the original idea that Chaosium had. But you're right, the large rulebook and all the work that has gone into Adventures in Glorantha must have looked impossible to fit in one volume. The only way to make RuneQuest and Glorantha fit together is by effectively excising the toolkit aspect of RQ 6, and printing only those rules relevant to Glorantha. I have the feeling that they want to marry them even more closely to the setting than was the case in RQ 2. Such that RQ and Glorantha become effectively inseparable. Not that a clever gm couldn't reverse-engineer something different out of it of course. But I think the future is going to make the divide apparent. Those of us who don't want to play in Glorantha will use Design Mechanism's rules, those that do will use Chaosium RuneQuest, and that leaves that frustrated group, who I feel for, who are very invested in RQ 6 and want to play in Glorantha, and were desperately eager for AiG to come out ...
All of this probably won't effect my gaming one jot, except that I'll have more DM supplements than I would have. All that is hurt is my feeling of belonging to the RuneQuest tribe, in which my membership appears to have been revoked ....

Quote from: Bren;867775The Hero's Journey and other Cambellian fillips are useful for Heroquesting, which historically has fallen somewhere between only minimally present and entirely nonexistent in the majority of Runequest games.

Quote from: Baron Opal;867819And, there's as much Narrativium as there is adventuring in Greyhawk with D&D. Heroquesting is a bear of a different color, I grant.

Fair enough.  The impression I'd gotten of Glorantha is that heroquesting is The Major Feature of the setting and something that characters would engage in frequently, whether in small scale reenactment of myths to gain new powers or full-blown, capital-H Heroquesting to reshape the fundamental nature of reality.

Still doesn't interest me, but at least I guess I don't need to be as ready to run screaming from the room if playing there is ever suggested.

Quote from: Phillip;868174RQ works fine, though, and I don't see how having the distinctive features of questing for runes, etc., included in the package for the rest of the audience is some kind of great hindrance. It's hard to see how such a belligerent attitude could be sensibly formed on the basis of Chaosium's RQ2, which was my referent.

It seems we're even, then.  You haven't read RQ6 (which is by no means the dry, flavorless textbook you seem to imagine) and I haven't read RQ2.  RQ6 and BGB were my first exposure to the BRP family and I had no exposure to Glorantha prior to the infamous GenCon announcement.

But I have backed the RQ2 kickstarter and look forward to reading the core PDF.

Quote from: Phillip;868174As I wrote, it was not a big deal, just bits of color such as descriptions of elves and dragons, a couple of inspirational maps by Bill Church (from WB&RM and Nomad Gods), and a brief big-picture overview.

Still all material that I'd just end up not using.  I'd much rather that the page count go towards suggestions on building your own flavorful world (which RQ6 has, and I do use) instead of enshrining any setting, even one that I love, as part of the core rules.

And that's assuming a setting which is easily removed.  Chaosium's most recent statements talk about things like the setting and rules reinforcing each other, which implies to me something like Ars Magica, where setting and system are so deeply intertwined that it's not easy to see how you would go about using either one without the other.

Quote from: Phillip;868174One might as well complain that Villains & Vigilantes or Champions was useless for making up your own campaign from scratch because of write-ups of CHESS and UNTIL (and contemporary-era assumptions generally). Likewise of course, only more so, Marvel Super Heroes. Traveller? Gamma World? Darned near every successful game ever? Too bad they had flavor, instead of being just technical algorithms with no context, so they couldn't be such huge sellers as the hundreds of "some guy's numbers" booklets published, eh?

Funny you should include Traveller in that list...  I first encountered Traveller in the LBB days.  Offhand, I don't recall the Third Imperium (or any other setting) even being mentioned in the LBBs.  Even if a setting was named, I'm quite certain that it was just the name - no history or cultural details or anything of that sort beyond what could be inferred from the rules.  (There are nobles and a Scout Service, but how do the nobles relate to the population at large and how does the Scout Service operate?  That's up to you.)  And I never got the slightest whiff of an expectation that you should play in The Official Setting.

On the contrary, those LBBs (and every subsequent edition of Traveller I've seen, up to and including the original Mongoose implementation) contained explicit methods for creating your own setting.  And it was specifically that which made me fall in love with Traveller and to continue to look to it as a source of inspiration 30ish years later.  It's also why, when I was forced to abandon most of my physical gaming paraphernalia, the second thing on my "must keep" list was my battered GDW Traveller Charts & Tables booklet.  (The first thing was the binder full of RoleMaster attack and crit tables.  Also very setting-neutral, but extremely flavorful.)

Classic Traveller didn't have a specific setting and Gamma World didn't really either. It had a blank hex map of a battered U.S.A. and was set after a massively destructive event... but not much else in the way of a setting. No mention of who or what caused the collapse and ruin.
Listing of monsters and equipment did kinda push a certain set of notions but I think they were really open to interpretation.

Quote from: markfitz;868239that leaves that frustrated group, who I feel for, who are very invested in RQ 6 and want to play in Glorantha, and were desperately eager for AiG to come out ...

This is a bit of a blow to the gut for that group, but with a little elbow grease it'd probably be pretty easy to use the new Chaosium RQ as a kind of Glorantha sourcebook for RQ6 (or even the next iteration of those rules) considering what I imagine will be something approaching nearly complete compatibility, even if just by dint of shared BRP heritage.

Quote from: matthulhu;868342This is a bit of a blow to the gut for that group, but with a little elbow grease it'd probably be pretty easy to use the new Chaosium RQ as a kind of Glorantha sourcebook for RQ6 (or even the next iteration of those rules) considering what I imagine will be something approaching nearly complete compatibility, even if just by dint of shared BRP heritage.

Yeah you're right of course. But I do feel for those people even though I wasn't one of them. They were really excited about AiG coming out for RQ 6 and having Pete's sure hand at the tiller. It'll just be a different vision I guess, but all the hard work that went into that supplement goes pouf. Tough blow. Still, many of the same people are also excited about Mythic Greece, for example.

Quote from: matthulhu;868342This is a bit of a blow to the gut for that group, but with a little elbow grease it'd probably be pretty easy to use the new Chaosium RQ as a kind of Glorantha sourcebook for RQ6 (or even the next iteration of those rules) considering what I imagine will be something approaching nearly complete compatibility, even if just by dint of shared BRP heritage.

Chaosium has said this week that their new version of RuneQuest is using RQ6 stat+stat skill calculation, RQ6 rules for skills over 100, RQ6 rules for opposed skills, RQ6 hit location rules and RQ6 Combat Styles. That's pretty much the whole core of they system. It's going to be pretty damn easy to use with RQ6.

Source. (http://basicroleplaying.org/topic/4176-what-is-the-status-of-rq6-glorantha/?do=findComment&comment=64781)

It's still a shame that we are losing two years of Pete Nash's work though.

Quote from: Phillip;868217I don't need to read them all to learn that the core book has 456 pages, more than 3.5 times as many as RQ2. I don't know whether they watered down Dwarves and Elves and Trolls to generic D&D copies. I don't know whether they dumped Dragonewts and Broos and Morokanths, Spirilt Binding Crystals and Rune Lords and Chaotic Creature Features.

A good chunk of the page count comes from the generously applied white- and line space that was inspired by an early layout proposal I worked on. The book is better off for it.

Quote from: Baulderstone;868391It's still a shame that we are losing two years of Pete Nash's work though.

Is it for sure that it's 'lost'? Does Chaosium have an alternative document ready to go? If not it seems like they could just buy the thing off him and tweak it, rather than starting all over... raise cash with another Kickstarter.

Quote from: Simlasa;868432Is it for sure that it's 'lost'? Does Chaosium have an alternative document ready to go? If not it seems like they could just buy the thing off him and tweak it, rather than starting all over... raise cash with another Kickstarter.

According to the discussion over at the TDM forums, it's not being used.

Quote from: markfitz;868239All that is hurt is my feeling of belonging to the RuneQuest tribe, in which my membership appears to have been revoked ....

That's more or less how I feel. It's as if Chaosium meant to say 'Sorry guys, but RuneQuest without Glorantha was not supposed to have existed, it was all a big mistake, now that we are in charge, RuneQuest will be Gloranthan, and only Gloranthan, as it should have been'.

Quote from: Baulderstone;868391Chaosium has said this week that their new version of RuneQuest is using RQ6 stat+stat skill calculation, RQ6 rules for skills over 100, RQ6 rules for opposed skills, RQ6 hit location rules and RQ6 Combat Styles. That's pretty much the whole core of they system. It's going to be pretty damn easy to use with RQ6.

Source. (http://basicroleplaying.org/topic/4176-what-is-the-status-of-rq6-glorantha/?do=findComment&comment=64781)

This point is more important than it seems at first. Chaosium claimed that RQ7 will be based on RQ2 rather than RQ6, but from their comments, it seems it will be like RQ6, but without the combat special effects, and the magic systems. IMHO, when Chaosium said they will use RQ2 as a starting point for their new RQ7, what they actually meant was that they want to divorce RQ7 from RQ6, and have Chaosium and The Design Mechanism go in different directions.

Quote from: Claudius;868550This point is more important than it seems at first. Chaosium claimed that RQ7 will be based on RQ2 rather than RQ6, but from their comments, it seems it will be like RQ6, but without the combat special effects, and the magic systems. IMHO, when Chaosium said they will use RQ2 as a starting point for their new RQ7, what they actually meant was that they want to divorce RQ7 from RQ6, and have Chaosium and The Design Mechanism go in different directions.

Yeah I think that divorcing the two lines is high priority, for whatever reasons. It's interesting that in fact they'll be using a lot of the basic mechanical innovations of RQ6 (or MRQ2, but Loz and Pete anyway), like Combat Styles, adding characteristics together for basic skill levels, opposed rolls .... But they're not taking what are the more flashy "signature moves", so to speak, of the system, its combat Special Effects, and its magic systems. It does look that way, and I'm rather glad that these particular selling points get to be Special Effects for Design Mechanism. Seems only right.