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.