Runequest at Gencon

[smiorgan]

 Ehi, guys! Why don't we go back to the post GenCon RQ news? 

 

 

[Jeff]

1 hour ago, styopa said:

1 hour ago, styopa said:

[lots of stuff snipped]

Have no doubts about it, the Avalon Hill period very nearly killed RuneQuest. Three basic reasons:

1. Too little, too late. Although Avalon Hill ultimately ended up printing 19 supplements for RuneQuest, let's look at that a bit more carefully. I don't have my MiG handy, but these included:

• Character sheet boxed sets. Enough said.
• Trollpack, Into the Troll Lands, Haunted Ruins, Apple Lane, and Snakepipe Hollow - reprints of RQ2 material (with new RQ3 stats and sometimes strangely edited).
• Daughters of Darkness and Elderad - two of the worst supplements ever.
• Monster Colosseum - an incomplete product that combined a pretty cool set of encounters, with a badly flawed attempt to reskin Circus Maximus.
• Griffin Island - Griffin Mountain with the soul and internal logic torn out. Although I did like Soldier Port.

So that's nine out of the seventeen. The nine remaining were golden - Gods of Glorantha, Genertela, Vikings, Ninja, Sun County, River of Cradles, Shadows on the Borderlands, Strangers in Prax, and Dorastor. But the new playable Gloranthan material was all from 1992-1994, after which Avalon Hill simply gave up on the line and the rights returned to Chaosium.

RQ3 probably would have done a lot better had Vikings and Ninja been product lines, with multiple books. Or had Mythic Earth actually been used in anything other than the examples. But for most of the market, the rules remained anchored to Glorantha, and there was no new scenario material until 1992.

2. Terrible relationship with the Chaosium creative team. Avalon Hill was purely a publisher, and contracted with Chaosium to create its product - the few times it did not were terrible disasters. You can ask Greg how well that relationship worked. And by 1988, Greg was trying to write something more "Gloranthan" than RQ3.

3. No real interest in the underlying product. Avalon Hill didn't have any personal love (or likely even interest) in RuneQuest beyond it being something that could keep their printers running. The pre-Ken Rolston era product shows that.  

Once Chaosium got RQ back in the mid-1990s, there was no real interest by Greg in doing much with RQ. Several projects were started to create what would be "RQ4," but Greg ultimately rejected all of them (Oliver's draft RQ4 was just one of several proposals out there). Greg was writing Glorantha material (heck that is one of his most prolific periods, with GRoY, FS, Harmast's Saga and lots more getting drafted), but Chaosium was not publishing RQ. And wouldn't until 2016 - over twenty years after AH lost the license.

Now it is interesting that if you ask Greg, Ken, Steve, etc., which version of RQ they thought was better designed, you'll almost always get a quick response, "RQ 2". If you ask other game designers - Frank Mentzer, Mark Rein-Hagen, Rob Heinsoo, Jonathan Tweet, Robin Laws, etc., you'll usually get the same answer. There's flaws in RQ2 (which we hopefully have fixed with the new RQ), but it fundamentally was better built than RQ3. 

Edited August 17, 2016 by Jeff

[MOB]

17 minutes ago, styopa said:

MOB can correct me if I'm wrong, but there's so much deep-seated dislike for nearly-anything-RQ3 in Chaosium combined with a healthy heaping of blinding rose-colored RQ2 nostalgia that I can't imagine RQ3 *ever* getting this treatment.

While cognizant of its flaws, I have a particular fondness for RQ3 given that my own material (Sun County, etc) was first published under those rules, and I recall the creative collaboration at the time with Ken Rolston etc with great affection. 

21 minutes ago, styopa said:

You seem to be somehow missing RosenMcstern's point?  By the link you posted, Chaosium produced 5 box sets in 2 years.  AH produced 17 products in 1985-1990 (that report says 19 but I flat-out disregard the stupid money-grab that were the character sheet "supplements").  

To understand why RQ was a commercial failure, you cannot simply disregard what were clearly released as the first two RQ3 "supplements" (they're even numbered that way). Fan reaction to them was highly negative to the point of incredulity - not only were they incredibly expensive, they followed on from the rules themselves which had not been well-received due to the premium cost and poor physical production quality. People were hanging out for the next Pavis or Borderlands; all they got was a succession of boxes with a pad in them. Stunts like this set a tone of mistrust and apprehension in the fan base which never went away and was compounded by the succession of reprints instead of new material. 

1 hour ago, styopa said:

And let's point out - there were EIGHT products, including new Glorantha material, JUST in 1988.  Not specifically scenario material, no.  But it's splitting a pretty fine hair to say "no new Glorantha scenarios" for "eight years".  

Again, AH might have produced a whole lot of product in that period, but to belabour the point I was making, if you wanted to play scenarios in Glorantha there was nothing new for eight years.

1 hour ago, styopa said:

And that page is dated, not really discussing much (aside from your appended note at the bottom) about  Sun County, River of Cradles, Shadows on the Borderlands, Strangers in Prax, Dorastor and Lords of Terror - really what I was referring to as some of the best game-supplements I've ever seen.

Yes, I like to think that too. But they came out too late to save RQ3. Imagine if this sequence had appeared in the previous eight years?

1 hour ago, styopa said:

No, the direction they were going may not have suited you personally, nor Chaosium.  For that matter, who chose to sell them the rights to RQ but not Glorantha?  Was that their choice or Chaosiums?  If Greg held tight to Glorantha by his choice*, you can hardly condemn AH for failing to produce Gloranthan material?

Greg has spoken many times of the remorse of getting into bed with Avalon Hill, almost from the go-get.

1 hour ago, styopa said:

But it seems to me like there's a little rewriting of historical narrative going on here to somehow contrive to paint Chaosium as the victim.  "We were doing great and it was all rainbows and (non-Ralzakark) unicorns until that nasty big corporate AH came and wrecked everything because they didn't do what we hoped!"  I don't know why?  Wouldn't the true burden of that result fall on whomever made the choice to take such an allegedly-flourishing product and farm it to another company?

Avalon Hill brazenly failed to live up to their end of the licensing arrangement, which is well-documented. AH's marketing and production "expertise" was supposed to boost RuneQuest's stocks even higher, but the commercial failure of RQ almost brought down Chaosium as a company. Greg regrets not walking when the proofs of the new rules came out without the authors' names on the cover (as stipulated in the contract). AH told him suck it up or walk, and the relationship only got worse.

1 hour ago, styopa said:

In short, I don't think you've made an objective case for "didn't do what MOB wanted" = "almost killed the game"

Well, I clearly haven't made a case that convinces you. But objectively RuneQuest in 2016 isn't spoken of in the same breath as DnD is it?

1 hour ago, styopa said:

Is it ironic to be cursing AH for spending so much time on reprints ... when Chaosium just took in $200k on RQ2 reprints, and is pretty much going back to the RQ2 well (again) and Dragon Pass (again) for RQ4...?  Aside from MRQ/MRQ2, Runequest has been nearly nothing BUT "reprints" since the AH days?  Hell, not to trivialize the astonishing amount of new content Jeff authored for the Guide, but c'mon - much of that was technically "reprint" material too? 

Which returns full circle to my original comment, that we seek to ensure the new edition of RQ will have plenty of new Gloranthan scenario material for people to play from the go-get, instead of having to wait eight years as happened with RQ3.

[Pentallion]

Finally, three decades later.  Grrrr.

 

Okay, now that we're all done poking THAT bad scab and watching it bleed, let's move on with what's coming up:  MORE SCENARIOS!!!!  D&D beware, your days are finally numbered!!!

[Rojo]

2 hours ago, Pentallion said:

MORE SCENARIOS!!!!  

Which is a great decision. Everybody knows why Pathfinder ate D&D.

[Atgxtg]

That is what's needed, and why, ultimately RQ, BRP  etc dropped to the wayside while games like D&D, Pendragon and CoC survived. The vast majority of GMs want pre-written adventures to run. It's also why the RQ3 debacle is relevant here. Even the good RQ3 stuff (the revised ruleset, RQ Vikings, etc.) received little support.

Personally, I'm hoping for the return of campaign packs as opposed to just stand alone adventures. I loved how Chaosium used to write up a setting in detail, with a half dozen adventures, and the toss in tons and tons of ideas that could be fleshed out to make an actual campaign. 

 

[SDLeary]

5 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

That is what's needed, and why, ultimately RQ, BRP  etc dropped to the wayside while games like D&D, Pendragon and CoC survived. The vast majority of GMs want pre-written adventures to run. It's also why the RQ3 debacle is relevant here. Even the good RQ3 stuff (the revised ruleset, RQ Vikings, etc.) received little support.

Personally, I'm hoping for the return of campaign packs as opposed to just stand alone adventures. I loved how Chaosium used to write up a setting in detail, with a half dozen adventures, and the toss in tons and tons of ideas that could be fleshed out to make an actual campaign. 

 

And speaking of Pendragon... it has actually managed to survive on the back of a single campaign! We need a GPC type campaign for RQ.

SDLeary

[Jeff]

New scenarios are a top priority for us. 

[Noita]

Campaign packs would be great.

Im dusting off my Sog's ruins...

[Jeff]

7 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

That is what's needed, and why, ultimately RQ, BRP  etc dropped to the wayside while games like D&D, Pendragon and CoC survived. The vast majority of GMs want pre-written adventures to run. It's also why the RQ3 debacle is relevant here. Even the good RQ3 stuff (the revised ruleset, RQ Vikings, etc.) received little support.

Personally, I'm hoping for the return of campaign packs as opposed to just stand alone adventures. I loved how Chaosium used to write up a setting in detail, with a half dozen adventures, and the toss in tons and tons of ideas that could be fleshed out to make an actual campaign. 

 

We are putting together a combination of both. Frex, the Gamemaster book will have several stand-alone adventures, but we already are putting together the first campaign pack, which will be one of the first subsequent publications.

[Yelm's Light]

On ‎8‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 1:49 AM, RosenMcStern said:

What I really find problematic is that some comments and analysis too often risk to trespass into the territory of "that version of the game produced BadWrongFun". At least one of the comments I quoted above is unpleasant to read for those who appreciated the de-Gloranthized supplement in question. I have recently read a snarky "you can keep yer Europe" comment that adds nothing positive to the discussion and is not in the tradition of these boards. Honestly, this is how the seeds of edition wars get planted, and edition wars are not in the tradition of BRP.

Sorry if you don't like my opinion, supported by reasons for said opinion.  I had neither use for RQIII nor motivation to switch to it, from a materials-quality or a support standpoint.  I am an unashamed Gloranthaphile, and RQIII didn't offer that until I'd almost completely stopped gaming.  Not exactly sure how giving feedback on products isn't in the 'tradition' of the boards, especially considering that I'm part of the target audience.

So you enjoyed RQIII.  Good for you.  I found it severely lacking in what I wanted.  If you want to call that starting an edition war, so be it.  (I consider it unlikely anyway, given that those who prefer RQIII appear to be a pretty small minority.)

In a thread labeled Chaosium's Runequest 2 Vs Runequest 3 (Avalon Hill)!  Forgive me, but spare me.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Yelm's Light

[RosenMcStern]

4 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

Sorry if you don't like my opinion, supported by reasons for said opinion.  I had neither use for RQIII nor motivation to switch to it, from a materials-quality or a support standpoint.  I am an unashamed Gloranthaphile, and RQIII didn't offer that until I'd almost completely stopped gaming.  Not exactly sure how giving feedback on products isn't in the 'tradition' of the boards, especially considering that I'm part of the target audience.

So you enjoyed RQIII.  Good for you.  I found it severely lacking in what I wanted.  If you want to call that starting an edition war, so be it.  (I consider it unlikely anyway, given that those who prefer RQIII appear to be a pretty small minority.)

In a thread labeled Chaosium's Runequest 2 Vs Runequest 3 (Avalon Hill)!  Forgive me, but spare me.

I have absolutely nothing against your opinion. It was the snarky tone of your comment that I disapprove, and consider "not in the tradition of these friendly boards". Try and rephrase it as "you can keep yer Glorantha with ducks and all the rest" and you will easily see what is inappropriate in it.

Edited August 18, 2016 by RosenMcStern
rephrased, removed passage

[Atgxtg]

9 hours ago, Jeff said:

We are putting together a combination of both. Frex, the Gamemaster book will have several stand-alone adventures, but we already are putting together the first campaign pack, which will be one of the first subsequent publications.

Great! I don't mind stand alone adventures, but Campaign packs were one of the things that really made RQ2 great. So when will the new RQ be available?

 

[Atgxtg]

11 hours ago, SDLeary said:

And speaking of Pendragon... it has actually managed to survive on the back of a single campaign! We need a GPC type campaign for RQ.

SDLeary

Well, there were a few spin offs that did expand things beyond the default campaign. Plus the Arthurian setting is a very rich setting, and not the only storyline going on in a good Pendragon campaign. And it was also a farily tightly focused one, since virtually all the PCs were knights. But you do have a point. I'd love to see something like that for RQ. Perhaps they could do a Dragon Pass campaign for Orlanthi? Even better still would be if it was a a "dual approach" campaign that could be played from either an Orlanthi or Lunar perspective. 

[Lurking Grue]

What excellent news, that the new RQ will have new published adventures as a priority of sorts. Yay! Big campaign books are awesome, of course, but sometimes I just want to run a smaller adventure taking a session or two, instead of a months long campaign. Also, for beginners and starting new player groups, a shorter introductory adventure is the way to go - to ease them into the game, rather than have everyone commit from the get go to the "long haul".

I've been out of the loop a bit, so apologies, but I'd like to know what the current release plan is for the new RQ edition? I take it, the finished manuscript was at GenCon and is being edited(?) at the moment. However, I read somewhere that Chaosium would possibly run a Kickstarter to fund the printing, commission extra art, etc. Is this true?

If there will be a KS for the new edition, that most likely means there's no way the books (which there are three) are coming out this year. Well regardless, I'm hopeful we'll see at least the 1st book released before the end of this year. One can always hope.

EDIT: Gah! I just read that there will be a Kickstarter, from one of Jeff's design blog threads. Okay, so when is this going to be? September, perhaps? You aren't probably going to release the books until all of them are done; so no chance of getting the 1st book early (as it is likely the most finished one)? Is there any chance that the books would be out this year? (I doubt it, but hey, one can ask.)

Edited August 18, 2016 by Lurking Grue

[SDLeary]

9 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Well, there were a few spin offs that did expand things beyond the default campaign. Plus the Arthurian setting is a very rich setting, and not the only storyline going on in a good Pendragon campaign. And it was also a farily tightly focused one, since virtually all the PCs were knights. But you do have a point. I'd love to see something like that for RQ. Perhaps they could do a Dragon Pass campaign for Orlanthi? Even better still would be if it was a a "dual approach" campaign that could be played from either an Orlanthi or Lunar perspective. 

If you are going back to 4e, yes. But they were very much sourcebook adventures, not full blown campaigns. Pendragon really only has one of those, but what a Campaign it is. 

An actual DragonPass campaign would be excellent. I think you'd have to have two separate ones to get both the Orlanthi and Lunar perspective though, or a mighty large book.

As an aside, I've heard of people using the GPC with RQ3/BRP... I have no idea how well it would have worked though. I have to imagine the casualty rate among characters was high! 

SDLeary

[jongjom]

On ‎18‎/‎08‎/‎2016 at 7:28 AM, Jeff said:

We are putting together a combination of both. Frex, the Gamemaster book will have several stand-alone adventures, but we already are putting together the first campaign pack, which will be one of the first subsequent publications.

What kind of design will the new scenarios have? RuneQuest of old (RQ Classic, RQIII) or more like Pendragon, or is it and now for something completely different?

Are you guys going to put any link for the GenCon RuneQuest seminar? It would be great to hear what was said.

[Yelm's Light]

On ‎8‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 6:53 AM, RosenMcStern said:

I have absolutely nothing against your opinion. It was the snarky tone of your comment that I disapprove, and consider "not in the tradition of these friendly boards". Try and rephrase it as "you can keep yer Glorantha with ducks and all the rest" and you will easily see what is inappropriate in it.

No, really, I don't see.  I was speaking for myself and no one else, nor was I trying to evangelize, and I don't see anyone else getting up in arms about it.  You seem to take it as some kind of insult.  If someone wants to ban me for speaking my mind, so be it.  But I'm not going to kid-glove everything.

[Nick J.]

Can you guys take this into PMs?

[MOB]

On 8/20/2016 at 3:55 PM, jongjom said:

What kind of design will the new scenarios have? RuneQuest of old (RQ Classic, RQIII) or more like Pendragon, or is it and now for something completely different?

Are you guys going to put any link for the GenCon RuneQuest seminar? It would be great to hear what was said.

There is a variety of writers involved, so no doubt there will be a variety of styles. Editorially, I don't think we'll be going back to the 'passive voice' style of RQ2 though. 

They key is we intend to have lots of new and exciting ready-to-play scenario material available from the go-get, including one-shots and campaigns. Whether RQ3 was liked or not, most people here seem to agree that was an important factor in the commercial failure of the RuneQuest 3 line. 

Edited August 22, 2016 by MOB

[Runeblogger]

17 hours ago, MOB said:

There is a variety of writers involved, so no doubt there will be a variety of styles. Editorially, I don't think we'll be going back to the 'passive voice' style of RQ2 though. 

They key is we intend to have lots of new and exciting ready-to-play scenario material available from the go-get, including one-shots and campaigns. Whether RQ3 was liked or not, most people here seem to agree that was an important factor in the commercial failure of the RuneQuest 3 line. 

I'm so excited about this focus on scenarios and campaigns. Please tell us more!
A while ago, you and Jeff did a podcast about Esrolia and the Holy Country. It looked like you were writing a book about it. I loved the ideas you commented about Casino Town, for example. A friend of mine even wrote a scenario set in Casino Town after that, which was a bit like Ocean's Eleven, really fun. So any news in this regard...?
 

[MOB]

1 hour ago, Runeblogger said:

I'm so excited about this focus on scenarios and campaigns. Please tell us more!
A while ago, you and Jeff did a podcast about Esrolia and the Holy Country. It looked like you were writing a book about it. I loved the ideas you commented about Casino Town, for example. A friend of mine even wrote a scenario set in Casino Town after that, which was a bit like Ocean's Eleven, really fun. So any news in this regard...?
 

Yep, that will go into the Holy Country campaign book we're putting together. I think we mentioned in the podcast that the Nochet stuff grew so big, it will be a book of its own to start with. Background and scenarios.

[Pentallion]

Happy Dance.  Sounds like the Second Renaissance.

[Belgath]

I know this is way late sorry as I had been fairly sick as of late. Gen Con was a blast got to GM a good number of Mythras games, that went really well. My son had the chance to make a Gloranthan PC and play the new version of RQ, he loved it. For the rest of the time there he kept on talking about the character creation process and the choices he got to make, he was ecstatic about it. I have to say you hit it out of the ballpark with your character creation process. He also enjoyed  the game play. The only bad part of it all, is I keep getting the New RuneQuest out yet questions.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Belgath

[styopa]

Was there ever any video shot of any RQ stuff at Gen Con?  Any talks, etc?