Mongoose Runequest II in 2010

[RosenMcStern]

Please understand him, Pete. Having your players hide in the restroom hoping for you to just give up rolling any damage at all can be frustrating.

Plus, the recent discussion on the Mongoose forum showed that there is a rule interpretation that could actually solve frogspawner's problem. Just roll the attack, the damage and the location together, and then decide which manoeuver(s) you wish to apply. After the first beheading or two, you will notice that players will no longer go to the loo when an attack against them is being rolled

[frogspawner]

Back-tracking? :confused: Is that all the thanks I get for including a frog totem in the article... Yes, I did have you in mind when I wrote that part.

'Expectation Management', mate. And think: "It made me quite enthusiastic. ... Loz/Pete seem to have done good things with combat manoeuvres and the various types of magic, though." - that's me, about MRQ! :shocked: Another achievement for you to be proud of. Oh, and... Thanks!

Please understand him, Pete. Having your players hide in the restroom hoping for you to just give up rolling any damage at all can be frustrating.

I foresee the solution more in colostomy bags. Can't be far off, now... :eek:

[Pete Nash]

'Expectation Management', mate. And think: "It made me quite enthusiastic. ... Loz/Pete seem to have done good things with combat manoeuvres and the various types of magic, though." - that's me, about MRQ! :shocked: Another achievement for you to be proud of. Oh, and... Thanks!

No problem! I sincerely hope this version will rejuvenate some interest in MRQ, and perhaps gain some respect.

I foresee the solution more in colostomy bags. Can't be far off, now... :eek:

Hell, that's one good reason not to use the roll all dice at once option! Bleaarg!

[lawrence.whitaker]

However, it's clearly still not the true Glorantha setting, just the newly-made-up "2nd Age" stuff. But then, even the HeroWars/Quest "3rd Age" stuff isn't proper Glorantha anymore, either...

It does beg the question, then, as to what is 'proper' Glorantha. Anything written before 1984? Only material written by Greg? Nothing beyond 'White Bear, Red Moon'? Only material you're interested in?

As to the newly-made-up 2nd Age stuff, Greg produced a comprehensive set of notes specifically on the 2nd Age drawn from many previous sources including King of Sartar, Glorious ReAscent of Yelm and other material that he's worked on for years. There's been a great deal of fresh material added by the Mongoose writers, naturally, but we all work as closely as possible with Greg and others to ensure continuity, canon and compatibility.

Your Glorantha Will Vary, of course. And rightly so. But saying that something is 'clearly still not the true Glorantha setting' presupposes that there's a single, solid, unchanging version of Glorantha out there; that one, definitive book, box, game or article that fixes, forever, the nature of the setting. If there is, please point me in its direction and I'll happily cleave to that forevermore.

[frogspawner]

It does beg the question, then, as to what is 'proper' Glorantha. ... Only material you're interested in?

Yes, that's the best definition. But remember the onus in on authors to engage that interest.

As to the newly-made-up 2nd Age stuff, Greg produced a comprehensive set of notes... There's been a great deal of fresh material added...

I'm sure you all work very hard.

But saying that something is 'clearly still not the true Glorantha setting' presupposes that there's a single, solid, unchanging version of Glorantha out there; that one, definitive book, box, game or article that fixes, forever, the nature of the setting. If there is, please point me in its direction and I'll happily cleave to that forevermore.

RQ2. The real one.

Mind you, that Sartar: Kingdom of Heroes does look interesting... (Though 50 quid plus for something with text on one of it's sample pages I know I've bought somewhere before is a bit steep. Pity it's for that daft HQ system, too.)

But keep working - you may yet get there!

[RosenMcStern]

Pity it's for that daft HQ system, too.)

Whether you like HQ2 is your opinion. But the amount of text in Sartar that has a direct relationship with the HQ rules (and should therefore be ignored/changed) to play it with BRP/RQ/BoL/SW/youNameIt is not more than 10%. I suppose your could find the remaining 90% useful.

[Baron]

What is "proper" Glorantha, or "proper" Runequest? Well, here's my opinion. Lets start with Runequest. The title "Runequest" sort of says it right there, the rules set is the set for playing in Glorantha, that world with the runes. I've seen it written in more than a few places that RQ3 and its sorcery (or whatever it's called) was an attempt by AH to move away from Glorantha. So, let's say that a proper rules set should be similar to and compatible with RQ2, skill-based, roll percentile dice. With its battle magic/rune magic/shamans/rune lords/rune priests. I think RQ3 probably qualifies too, since I've mellowed in my old age. Hero Wars/Hero Quest, no. I read enough in the reviews of MRQ to conclude that there were some changes I would probably find significant enough so that I would be unsatisfied with the game. Therefore I chose not to purchase it. And that's the only vote I get.

Now as to Glorantha. Our exposure to Glorantha for rpg's, back in the good old days of RQ2, was mostly Pavis/Big Rubble/Prax and nearby environs. Yeah, there were a few other products at the time, but I think it would be fair to say that we had more exposure to Pavis/Prax and environs than to anything else. So that's what I think of when I think of Glorantha. That's where our games were set. Those were the areas I was most interested in. And that's where I remain interested in playing.

So, "Sartar Kingdom of Heroes" may be set somewhere in Glorantha, it may be Greg's vision, but much like "King of Sartar" and "Glorantha: Introduction to the Hero Wars" (both of which I own), it's on and on about other cultures that aren't what I was interested in. Just setting them on the same lozenge-world doesn't mean I will find them interesting. Sure, Greg'll get tired of writing about Prax, Pavis, the Lunar occupation, the Block and the non-humans that brush up against them. But that's the campaign I bought. I'd continue to buy adventure packs set in that area. Providing they were compatible with RQ2.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the terms "fixed" and "unchanging" as a part of this conversation. How are those relevant terms? In my opinion, and that's all it is, I don't see it. Change for change's sake? Not of value. I didn't express any interest in playing in an age prior to the setting I bought into. If someone wants to try and sell something that's *related* to what's been published, well then it's a *relative.* It's not the real thing. There's not much reason I can see to expect fans of the "core" setting (if you will) to be interested enough to purchase a relative of what they like, the further you remove your product from the core.

Let's take Traveller and the Third Imperium. I feel the same way about that rules set and setting. When they released MegaTraveller, they changed the rules. For example, they added various degrees of difficulty to task resolution. Bah, changes the game that I liked just fine. And they took the fantastic, complex, star-spanning empire I loved and was inspired by, and trashed it. So, I stopped buying the products, had no interest in what they were selling. I owned everything that was published prior to that point. And then they lost me. Sorry, Marc.

And if you will indulge me, allow me to rant a moment about multiple editions of rules. Hate it. Playtest the hell out of your game prior to release. When it's DONE, release it. Any rules that you might feel compelled to publish after that release, if it's absolutely necessary to do so, should be completely compatible with what's come before. I won't play along with buying a new set of rules every few years. A good game? Call of Cthulhu. Pretty much any edition can be swapped out for any other. A bad game? Stormbringer. Loved it. The first time. How many editions did they come out with? Five or so? Changes were just too much after a while, and I became alienated. Sorry, not interested in playing along with that.

So what's the goal? If you've got a consumer base that loves your products, and you want to try and expand your product line, then go ahead and release some related stuff. But don't abandon or make obsolete the product line that attracted your customers in the first place, unless you're willing to lose them.

All right, enough. Apologies for ranting. Obviously these are only my opinions. I would suggest that it's possible that my thirty-plus years in gaming, and the number of dollars I've invested in the hobby, might make my opinions of some interest, but that too is only my opinion. Again, I look forward to hearing the grognards' reviews of MRQ2, whenever it comes out. Thanks, all.

[frogspawner]

Apologies for ranting. ... Thanks, all.

No need. On the contrary - Thank You! That was spot-on.

[rust]

Oops, bad luck for me - I do not agree at all, but I also do not want to re-

peat a discussion I have grown tired of during Traveller's "version wars".

So, to cut it as short as possible: When a new edition is published, not a

single word of the previous edition is changed or disappears, you can con-

tinue to play it and ignore all later editions completely - they do not des-

troy your favourite game, they add another dimension you can use or not.

To hate them is quite a waste of emotion, your favourite game is no wor-

se off than it were if it had been discontinued without another, different

edition - nothing lost at all, even if nothing were gained with the new edi-

tion.

Just my opinion, of course.

[Baron]

I don't disagree with you at all, Rust. And I've read a whole lot of fan reactions to various issues over the years, too, and have no need to repeat any of it.

I will say that, in my opinion, there is something lost, though. New products that are 100% compatible with your game. Feelings of good will towards a company that values and supports you, the segment of its fans/customers that didn't want their game/campaign replaced. Also, some players and some potential players may not have interest in my game, as they will expect to play the current, available, supported, advertised game. Which I understand completely, but don't have to like. I've lost all of that, although I continue to play the games and worlds I love.

[rust]

I've lost all of that, although I continue to play the games and worlds I love.

I understand that, and I dislike it when it happens with one of my favourite

games.

On the other hand, there are - usually good, commercial - reasons why an

edition is discontinued or replaced with a new edition, and the alternative

to the new edition usually is the "death" of the entire line.

With the new edition around, the game at least continues, although perhaps

not exactly in the way I would like best.

To use your Traveller example: Better to have MegaTraveller in the shops af-

ter the end of Classic Traveller than no Traveller at all - at least in my view.

[Rurik]

I don't disagree with you at all, Rust. And I've read a whole lot of fan reactions to various issues over the years, too, and have no need to repeat any of it.

I will say that, in my opinion, there is something lost, though. New products that are 100% compatible with your game. Feelings of good will towards a company that values and supports you, the segment of its fans/customers that didn't want their game/campaign replaced. Also, some players and some potential players may not have interest in my game, as they will expect to play the current, available, supported, advertised game. Which I understand completely, but don't have to like. I've lost all of that, although I continue to play the games and worlds I love.

While I understand entirely where you are coming from, this thread is about Mongoose Runequest. I don't think there is anyone, including those of us that used the system (warts and all), that felt the system didn't need a rewrite with some parts getting a major overhaul. If you have a perfectly good system why change it, true, but MRQ1 really did need an update.

[Thalaba]

So, to cut it as short as possible: When a new edition is published, not a

single word of the previous edition is changed or disappears, you can con-

tinue to play it and ignore all later editions completely - they do not des-

troy your favourite game, they add another dimension you can use or not.

To hate them is quite a waste of emotion, your favourite game is no wor-

se off than it were if it had been discontinued without another, different

edition - nothing lost at all, even if nothing were gained with the new edi-

tion.

Just my opinion, of course.

This is an often used argument, but it's not quite true. It is true that the text in the books you bought doesn't change, and that you can keep playing. But what does change is official support for an edition. The parent company stops producing books for the old editions and they eventually disappear off the shelves. They also tell other publishers to stop supporting the system, as mongoose has just done. They actively (and usually successfully) try to get people to switch to the new edition. What this means for the fan of the old is that they can no longer look forward to new products and that, over time, it will be harder and harder to find new players for the game they like. And that is a big loss.

In publishing, new editions of books were brought out under new covers, often by new publishers, without changing the author's original text (except in some cases, like history texts, where things are updated to reflect new discoveries). They might add a new introduction, new art, a glossary, or something else, but they don't substantively change the work. This idea that a new edition is an oportunity to make substantive changes to a game seems like a new one, to me, and pretty much restricted to the gaming community - it seems to come from computer games, where new technologies seem to encourage dramatic changes. But I'm not sure it's really called for in RPGs. I think it's really just a publisher's tool for re-selling the same old thing to the same old people a second time around. It's a great business oportunity, but hardly benefits the fans of the game.

IMO and all that

Thalaba

[rust]

I think it's really just a publisher's tool for re-selling the same old thing to the same old people a second time around. It's a great business oportunity, but hardly benefits the fans of the game.

Of course. However, consider the alternative. Once the sales of a game drop

beneath the "profit point", the publisher cannot continue to produce material

for it without committing financial suicide. So he can either offer a new, "im-

proved" version to keep the game alive, or he can discontinue it completely

and produce something else.

[badcat]

The crappiest thing that has been done to a favorite game of mine, IMO, is the deal between Chaosium and Mongoose to 'kill' the pdf versions of Stormbringer 1 when MRQ came out. It still gripes me. And it makes me hesitant to buy into anything from either company again. Although I have picked up two or three items from both companies together since then I would have been much more likely to have bought *many* more of the rpg books they have published since the SB1 stuff 'disappeared', SB1 having been my game of first choice (having access to replacement pdfs would not have hurt their business as much as what they did, in my case) and a game which was literally jerked out from under me. That's real.

So although 'RQ2' looks like it might be OK (or maybe not...there may be too many options and so forth whilst the latest BRP book sort of raped the system of its charm for me), I'll probably look to other games altogether. Savage Worlds is probably going to be my go to game from now on, although some of the SW settings would be good with BRP or MRQ2, and I drift in that direction when I see shiny toys like MRQ2. I really think enough is enough, but hey, this thread and some attitude from Mongoose adherents has pushed me away, I do believe!

Happy gaming, I will be running some Savage Worlds this weekend. It's simple, playable and fun...much like SB1 was before it was deleted from existance.

[SDLeary]

In publishing, new editions of books were brought out under new covers, often by new publishers, without changing the author's original text (except in some cases, like history texts, where things are updated to reflect new discoveries). They might add a new introduction, new art, a glossary, or something else, but they don't substantively change the work. This idea that a new edition is an oportunity to make substantive changes to a game seems like a new one, to me, and pretty much restricted to the gaming community - it seems to come from computer games, where new technologies seem to encourage dramatic changes. But I'm not sure it's really called for in RPGs. I think it's really just a publisher's tool for re-selling the same old thing to the same old people a second time around. It's a great business oportunity, but hardly benefits the fans of the game.

IMO and all that

Thalaba

Unless of course you are Chaosium and the product is Cthulhu!

SDLeary

[SDLeary]

The crappiest thing that has been done to a favorite game of mine, IMO, is the deal between Chaosium and Mongoose to 'kill' the pdf versions of Stormbringer 1 when MRQ came out. It still gripes me. And it makes me hesitant to buy into anything from either company again. Although I have picked up two or three items from both companies together since then I would have been much more likely to have bought *many* more of the rpg books they have published since the SB1 stuff 'disappeared', SB1 having been my game of first choice (having access to replacement pdfs would not have hurt their business as much as what they did, in my case) and a game which was literally jerked out from under me. That's real.

So although 'RQ2' looks like it might be OK (or maybe not...there may be too many options and so forth whilst the latest BRP book sort of raped the system of its charm for me), I'll probably look to other games altogether. Savage Worlds is probably going to be my go to game from now on, although some of the SW settings would be good with BRP or MRQ2, and I drift in that direction when I see shiny toys like MRQ2. I really think enough is enough, but hey, this thread and some attitude from Mongoose adherents has pushed me away, I do believe!

Happy gaming, I will be running some Savage Worlds this weekend. It's simple, playable and fun...much like SB1 was before it was deleted from existance.

Just to be fair, I think that many of the restrictions on what Chaosium could and could not do under the agreement were probably dictated by Moorcock, who was always critical of Chasoium's efforts after he realized the licensing potential, or potential licensing potential.

SDLeary

[Thalaba]

Of course. However, consider the alternative. Once the sales of a game drop

beneath the "profit point", the publisher cannot continue to produce material

for it without committing financial suicide. So he can either offer a new, "im-

proved" version to keep the game alive, or he can discontinue it completely

and produce something else.

I'm no RPG industry guru - is this something that commonly happens? Did D&D3.5 and WFRP2 threaten to fall below the profit point? Was D&D3.5 a 'financial suicide machine'? I'm skeptical - Pathfinder wouldn't exist if that was the case. Personally, I don't object to 'new and improved' so much as I object to 'this is a completely different game that were calling XYZ4 even though it bears no resemblance to XYZ3'.

Anyway - I'm not saying new editions don't benefit the company - I'm just trying to explain why the fans of the old edition might resent the new one.

I've not heard anyone complain that a new CoC edition fails to capture the essence of the game. What's more, people that own earlier editions of CoC can still buy new supplements and find them perfectly usable. But people who own WFRP2 no longer can.

[rust]

I'm no RPG industry guru - is this something that commonly happens?

At least over here it is very common.

But there are of course companies that are far more interested in their profits

than in their products and do not feel a need to balance their commercial in-

terests with the "content interests" of the fans.

To get back on topic, in my view the examples you mentioned (especially the

WotC example) are of that kind, while I see both Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu

and Mongoose's Runequest II as examples where companies offer good con-

tent to justify the production and sale of a new edition.

[threedeesix]

Just to be fair, I think that many of the restrictions on what Chaosium could and could not do under the agreement were probably dictated by Moorcock, who was always critical of Chasoium's efforts after he realized the licensing potential, or potential licensing potential.

SDLeary

Care to start a pool as to whether in 5-10 years Mongoose is still bothering with the various Moorcock games? The difference I see with Mongoose and Chaosium, is that Mongoose has higher expectations from their licensed products. This may have been a good "short-term" move by Moorcock, but we'll see if he's shopping it around again in a few years. On the whole, I've seen few literary licenses last as long for other companies as the Moorcock ones did for Chaosium. Can anyone out there think of any? I don't think it was a testament to Moorcock that the games have been around so long with Chaosium as much much as it was for Chaosium keeping an interest in it. Even if they may not have been pumping out the volume of material that everyone would have liked.

Rod

Edited December 17, 2009 by threedeesix

[RosenMcStern]

Rod, you are right in saying that Chaosium showed some long-term commitment to the MM licenses. I think Moorcock's resentment towards Chaosium was misplaced. But, unfortunately, this is how things go.

However, onw may still prefer SB over EoM (and since the latter was written by Loz, I see no great reason to dislike it), but Mongoose has plans for the EC line that will not last for just a few months. I doubt the thing will die out so soon.

[rust]

It seems that Chaosium had both the "longest" (Moorcock) and the "shortest"

(Niven) literary license of all roleplaying games companies.

[frogspawner]

It seems that Chaosium had both the "longest" (Moorcock) and the "shortest" (Niven) literary license of all roleplaying games companies.

What was the problem with Niven, please remind me?

[threedeesix]

Rod, you are right in saying that Chaosium showed some long-term commitment to the MM licenses. I think Moorcock's resentment towards Chaosium was misplaced. But, unfortunately, this is how things go.

However, onw may still prefer SB over EoM (and since the latter was written by Loz, I see no great reason to dislike it), but Mongoose has plans for the EC line that will not last for just a few months. I doubt the thing will die out so soon.

I have nothing against Mongoose, nor the current version of the EC line as I'm sure it's awesome. I actually purchase several Mongoose products; Paranoia, Traveller, Judge Dread, and Babylon 5 (alas, now gone). I'm not saying it will die out soon, as 5-10 years is a long time for a literary license (I never said a few months). But from experience, I just don't see this as being any different, but time will tell.

Rod

Edited December 17, 2009 by threedeesix

[SDLeary]

Care to start a pool as to whether in 5-10 years Mongoose is still bothering with the various Moorcock games? The difference I see with Mongoose and Chaosium, is that Mongoose has higher expectations from their licensed products. This may have been a good "short-term" move by Moorcock, but we'll see if he's shopping it around again in a few years. On the whole, I've seen few literary licenses last as long for other companies as the Moorcock ones did for Chaosium. Can anyone out there think of any? I don't think it was a testament to Moorcock that the games have been around so long with Chaosium as much much as it was for Chaosium keeping an interest in it. Even if they may not have been pumping out the volume of material that everyone would have liked.

Rod

Actually, Mongoose giving up on the license or Moorcock unhappy and shopping it around again would not surprise me at all. I was simply commenting on the fact that product was unavailable and potentially why. Moorcock was so ... odd... that he sued Chaosium several times to try and get the license back. I imagine that Chaosium simply said enough, and got rid of a line that was costing them money on the legal side to try and retain.

SDLeary