Jump to content

Ian Cooper

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Ian Cooper last won the day on September 8

Ian Cooper had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

998 Excellent

1 Follower

About Ian Cooper

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • RPG Biography
    30 year veteran of BRP games including Call of Cthulhu & Runequest. More than 10 year veteran of HeroQuest (Hero Wars etc.). Published Gloranthan author. Active gamer with the Monday Nighters.
  • Current games
    HeroQuest: Glorantha, Call of Cthulhu, Fiasco, Puppetland, Numenera, The Clay that Woke, Microscope, Risus, Questlandia, 13th Age, The One Ring
  • Location
    London, England, UK
  • Blurb
    Software Developer in London, conference speaker, tabletop gamer, geek. Tattooed, pierced, and bearded.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There has been clarification around terminology mainly, so that it is consistent etc. Similarly a few progressions have been standardized on the +3, +6 +9 etc scale. One major change is around character advancement which we have tried to make more meaningful. But it's compatible with HQ and HQG, it's just cleaned up. I'd suggest that we would expect to see the SRD come out, everyone to error trap, and then for us to re-release a fixed version. We hope to have an efficient process for that.
  2. We are discussing the Open License we will be using. Sorry, it’s real soon now, but we need to get the choice of license right, because there is no do-over.
  3. Maybe. I think that RQG and HQG are like a venn diagram for scenarios. About 30% of scenarios are the intersection, and work perfectly well in either game. About 35% each are RQG or HQG scenarios that don't work as well in the other game.
  4. Just clumsy I think. Simon Bray actually created that character for a freeform: "The Wolf that Came in from the Cold" so he might have had other ideas, but I think it was a klutz moment. Back in Thunder Rebels a clan had a champion, who was the best fighter and would take up arms should the clan end up deciding to settle a lawsuit via single combat with their opponents, or decided to lead off a fight with their enemies in single combat. Sartar, Kingdom of Heroes didn't really pick that up, but I liked the position and kept that role for some clans. As @jajagappa implies, it's essentially the best fighter in the clan
  5. Congratulations. Glad to have you aboard.
  6. We had a fair amount on Sartarite urban Orlanthi Pavis, and that material has been echoed in different versions of that text. We don't have so much on the Heortlanders, or the Esrolians, or even the Orlanthi cities of the EWF however.
  7. I think you should use whatever you find valuable in the works that draw from Greg's well. We will all be happier.
  8. I don't think it was a diatribe, more a vision of a different world. YMMV.
  9. I'd like to clarify a couple of points. First, it is clear that we already have a divergent Glorantha. If I want to play stories in Glorantha **now** I can pick KoDP or Six Ages. I can pick 13th Age Glorantha. I can pick HQG. I can pick RQG. Or I could pick up an older presentation such as HW or RQ2. Over the years different creative voices have had their moment 'in the sun' and revised the setting to their liking. Add in fan publications that 'fill in the gaps' and there is a **lot** of versions of Glorantha. We have some touchstones, such as The Guide to Glorantha, but even from such a base, some drift is occurring. Even canon has become a loaded term. What is canon for 13th Age is not canon for HQG is not canon for RQG is not canon for Six Ages. All draw inspiration from the same well, yet all differ. And so what to do? If a 13G book adventure is consistent with the Glorantha presented in a the 13G book, but not the one presented in RQG is that 'canon'. Is it even wrong? Should that 13G volume choose consistency with the core book, or a later RQG book that none of its players may have? This is a very real question for the HQG line. Sartar Kingdom of Heroes and Sartar Companion are foundational works for the line, appearing even before HQG did. Should an HQG product conform to their description of the Orlanthi and Sartar? Of should they conform to the one described in an RQG book that players of that game do not have? The alternative is that we try to move beyond 'canon' and look to stories instead. What story did KoDP want to tell? It wanted to tell the story of the resettlement of Dragon Pass by the Orlanthi? Was it going to be Sartar's story ever? No. It drew from that wellspring, but it was not that story. Now I'm obviously not arguing for stupid inconsistencies that are born of laziness. But I am arguing for divergence being inevitable, ad judged on its own merits, provided what comes forth obviously originates from the well-spring. Given we must accept YGWV at the table, why not go further and accept it on the door
  10. At some point we have to chose some terminology, and if we use terrestrial terms it comes with baggage. Given that we have weathered the baggage that we already have from Greg using terms such as odal, carl, cottar, thane, chieftain or even earl I am not sure that introducing new terrestrial terms won't just reset the clock to zero on those problems. Would using anax instead really help for example? The reference to Mycenean culture is probably more obscure than just using chieftain or king. And anyone reviewing older material, including the Guide to Glorantha is going to get very confused. The category terms are fine for describing Glorantha cross-cultures, but lack resonance in play: "I am Koschei, a Free Common man of the Culbrea" is very flat. I would suggest there is little to be gained from changing the established terms that we have in The Guide to Glorantha. The Orlanthi terms there are noble, thane, carl, cottar and thrall (and implicitly there is chief and priest). They have variants there too, if folks prefer 'translated' terms: noble, horseman, cattleman, sheepman, and slave if we need. We know that the non-archeological evidence for Urnfield or Mycenean culture etc. is limited and we will always be limited to viewing them through the lens of the descendants be that the Irish of the Tain, the Scandinavians of Beowulf, even the Myceneans of the Illiad (who are far more of Homer's time than their own). So be it. It's a fantasy world and we can explore such historical inaccuracies without fear.
  11. Dreams get some coverage in Revealed Mythologies, and there are Dream magicians in the East. The goddess of dreams is Thella, better know to you and I perhaps as the White Moon goddess. And the Black Moon is the god of Nightmares. From Revealed Mythologies: The text goes on to explain that the dream magician can bring things from the dream world into this. This sounds a lot like illusions of course. In HQG, Lunar Magic is described as Glamours effectively illusions, so there is a connection between Moon->Dreams->illusions Also there are dangers of becoming a Dream Wraith from overextending yourself. And of course reality is but an illusion
  12. Yes, as others have noted it comes from the Dragon Pass and is part of the remains of the giant. I'd not noted that we did not include those in the local gazetteer in this book.
  13. I think that is a smart choice. It's worth bringing up in the new core book as a discussion point (over a rule).
  14. I tend to invoke a really interesting idea by S .John Ross nowadays to describe the difference between the two; the Invisible Rulebook. The concept is that some games have more specific rules for what may happen, others less. So HeroQuest has just one universal rule (the contest) which GMs interpret for everything. RuneQuest has rules for a lot more things: how far you can jump, how much it hurts if you miss and fall etc. RuneQuest gives you a strong model of how its world works, HeroQuest relies on the interpretation of the GM (and if the GM wants a good play experience, the players). The advantage of an Invisible Rulebook game is speed, and flexibility. It's disadvantage is greater GM workload, you have to create far more rulings. [There is a lot of sympathy between the rulings idea in OSR and games like HQ]. Ultimately it's matter of taste. S. John Ross describes games like HQ as being 'high trust' meaning that they work well where players trust the GM's rulings. But another way of interpreting that is if you get entertainment from 'winning' against the GM and the challenges he sets, HQ is probably not the game for you. But if you want to tell fast-moving stories that cover a lot of ground as a group it may well be. We are fortunate to have choice. And it's possible to like both, for what each does, not 'choose a tribe'. In fact, that always feels like the smart choice.
  • Create New...