Resurrecting RuneQuest (Black Gate)

[Yelm's Light]

Art can certainly have other benefits than being nice to look at.  Witness the detail involved in art direction for Chaosium stuff recently.  (Was it MOB who was doing that?  I forget without doing a bunch of searching.)  It can illustrate things about the setting in ways that words can't or at least can do so more efficiently.  It can also inspire storylines and/or roleplaying.  Of course there's the caveat, 'when it's done right.'

I'd also argue that maps are included under the definition of art, and they clearly have informational value.

[Grievous]

Absolutely. I'm an old school gamer, but I was never into Runequest in the old days. The game seemed goofy and strange, and this combined with the haphazard (and less than illustrious) art of those days came together to produce a feeling that the game wasn't well thought-out. Now, there certainly are bits of Glorantha that are whimsical, but I would never say the game isn't well thought-out now, so it's fair to say that I was mislead (or just wrong, if you don't want to be generous to me). Also, consider the much maligned ducks in that context. They did look goofy, but now seeing some of the more "modern" portrayals of them I'm able to move beyond goofy and really appreciate them (I mean that duck on the Cradle looks badass).

It was King of Dragon Pass that brought me into the fold actually, from there graduating to Heroquest. KotD had a clear sense of art direction (even if it isn't currently considered to be exactly how Glorantha is intended) and that helped me digest it (though I wasn't a huge fan of the ducks there yet tbqh) and formulate a conception of the world and its workings. It definitely influenced how my first forays into the setting in role-playing looked like in my mind's eye, even though at that stage My Glorantha Definitely Varied from canon. Now, I'm very glad the game is moving away from the pure viking/anglo-saxon look to something different, more unique and that a lot of attention is put on the art. That has brought me completely into the fold and I will be running Runequest when the new game comes out - which feels odd after so many years of staying away from it. My interpretation of Glorantha has also moved to be aligned with the canon, and the art has something to do with that as well.

So, yeah, art is definitely important - at least to how I conceive of these things. I would say especially so for something like Glorantha. It's also definitely something that makes me buy books, so though it isn't cheap to produce, I'm pretty sure it gets people investing.

Edited January 24, 2018 by Grievous

[Mugen]

On 30/12/2017 at 5:10 PM, Runeblogger said:

Thanks for posting these really bad art, it almost made me laugh out loud.  Please show us more, if you can, I've never had a look through the pages of the original versions.

I can show you some art from the Spanish translation of Elder Secrets. The company that published this supplement in Spain had the good taste to hire an artist to create art specifically for the Spanish edition. I wasn't great, but it was way better IMO (at least the weapon is pointing in the right direction!). The artist is Albert Monteys.
Below you can see the piece of art that replaced the mostali seen above:

 

French publisher of RQ3 did the same for all their books.

It resulted in not very gloranthan Uz and Aldryami, but the art was better than the original. 

Here is an illustration of an Uz and a Lankhor Mhy priest in Gods of Glorantha by Guillaume Sorel :

Edited January 25, 2018 by Mugen

[MOB]

12 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

Art can certainly have other benefits than being nice to look at.  Witness the detail involved in art direction for Chaosium stuff recently.  (Was it MOB who was doing that?  I forget without doing a bunch of searching.)  It can illustrate things about the setting in ways that words can't or at least can do so more efficiently.  It can also inspire storylines and/or roleplaying.  Of course there's the caveat, 'when it's done right.'

I have been working on art direction for the soon-to-be-released 13th Age Glorantha (with Rob Heinsoo). It's been a pleasure working with talented artists the likes of Michelle Lockamy, Caleb Cleveland, Andrey Fetisov, Simon Bray, Kalin Kadiev and others. Some of that stuff has been shared here.

I also did the art direction for Khan of Khans, working with Ian O'Toole, and Andrey Fetisov's cover art for the RQ Quickstart (also worked with Andrey on Call of Cthuhu The Coloring Book).

However, Jeff is the key driver of art direction for all things Gloranthan though, and is overseeing art direction for the new RuneQuest line. It's going to look amazing.

We think 13G, the Glorantha Sourcebook and the new RuneQuest line are really going to raise the bar when it comes to the quality of the art!  

Edited January 25, 2018 by MOB

[styopa]

39 minutes ago, MOB said:

I have been working on art direction for the soon-to-be-released 13th Age Glorantha (with Rob Heinsoo). It's been a pleasure working with talented artists the likes of Michelle Lockamy, Caleb Cleveland, Andrey Fetisov, Simon Bray, Kalin Kadiev and others. Some of that stuff has been shared here.

I also did the art direction for Khan of Khans, working with Ian O'Toole, and Andrey Fetisov's cover art for the RQ Quickstart (also worked with Andrey on Call of Cthuhu The Coloring Book).

However, Jeff is the key driver of art direction for all things Gloranthan though, and is overseeing art direction for the new RuneQuest line. It's going to look amazing.

We think 13G, the Glorantha Sourcebook and the new RuneQuest line are really going to raise the bar when it comes to the quality of the art!  

"Going to"?

No, I think the Guide, and particularly the attention to every aspect of art direction from the images to the simplest details of layout in (something as nominally trivial as) the RQG free rules HAS ALREADY quite clearly shown that the art inn RQG will be:

- evocative

- referential and meaningful (as Jeff mentioned, no more pointless cavorting eye candy)

- extremely high quality

- meticulously planned to convey not just a useful visualization, but generally be chock-full of interesting and insightful tidbits of Gloranthania

You may feel you have even more bar-raising coming in the pipeline, but already I can't think of any rpg whose art is so tightly integrated into the world.  (Honestly, most fantasy art feels like layout blocking more than anything...)

Is that partly due to the depth of Glorantha? Sure, a bit.  But it's you guys taking the initiative, as well as investing the time and money that shows that it editorially matters to you.

That's a pretty high bar already.

Edited January 25, 2018 by styopa

[Mankcam]

19 hours ago, styopa said:

It may be cheesy, cheap, pedestrian, uninspired, prepubescent boy-fodder fantasy art, but it's certainly not BAD as art. 

What's next, you're going to say Boris Vallejo was a hack?

We're talking about technically terrible art, not offended sensibilities.   If a couple of cheesy pics of girls with improbably big boobs "totally ruins" a set of rules I think you're paying way too much attention to the wrong bits.  I'd say the same thing to Evangelicals who think RPGs are about Satan-worshipping because there's a picture of a demon or two.  Daughters of Darkness was a TERRIBLE module, only made worse by the accompanying art, not that it was a terrible product because of the terrible art.  Elder Secrets had abysmal art, but was a decent product informationally.

 Well I was initially talking about art quality, and agree with your examples, after all I was one of the ones who posted those really shoddy Elder Secrets pics.

It was Jeff who brought up the MRQ2 bimbos, and I didn’t think they were that bad compared to some of the worst RQ3 art.

However I felt that Jeff was perhaps referencing sensibilities, and if so,  I see his point as it did make that rulebook feel quite tacky. 

And believe me, impossibly big ‘boobs’ does not offend me, but those pics just looked cheesy in the context they were presented in

Now if Boris Vallejo had illustrated the book, it would have been a different story 

Totally on the same page as your post regarding the G2G raising the bar in regards to art direction. HQG was great as well, so the upcoming releases should be really good

Edited January 25, 2018 by Mankcam

[Steve]

I'm with Jeff on this one. Those referenced MRQ2 pics just scream "bad art" to me. It's extremely obvious that they're just pics of ladies from somewhere contemporary with said "fantasy stuff" crudely plonked onto them. Why, just why?

 

[Jeff]

46 minutes ago, Mankcam said:

 Well I was initially talking about art quality, and agree with your examples, after all I was one of the ones who posted those really shoddy Elder Secrets pics.

It was Jeff who brought up the MRQ2 bimbos, and I didn’t think they were that bad compared to some of the worst RQ3 art.

However I felt that Jeff was perhaps referencing sensibilities, and if so,  I see his point as it did make that rulebook feel quite tacky. 

And believe me, impossibly big ‘boobs’ does not offend me, but those pics just looked cheesy in the context they were presented in

Now if Boris Vallejo had illustrated the book, it would have been a different story 

Totally on the same page as your post regarding the G2G raising the bar in regards to art direction. HQG was great as well, so the upcoming releases should be really good

I'm a fan of plenty of pulp fantasy art - Boris Vallejo, Frank Franzetta, etc. And certainly have no trouble with nudity in art. But I found the MRQ2 art far more painful than the Dobyski stuff as at least I could figure out what he was trying to do. I remember when Greg and I saw the finished book for the first time (we certainly never got to look at draft art in these books) and our jaws dropped at how insultingly bad some of the art was. 

[Mankcam]

Yes I can imagine it must have been pretty awful for Greg to see RQ getting so tacky.

At least he has seen things come full swing, and then some, with the release of the G2G . I think that made every long term fan very proud to be part of the Gloranthan fanbase.

It's never been a better time to show Glorantha off to others

 

Edited January 25, 2018 by Mankcam

[David Scott]

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

But I found the MRQ2 art far more painful than the Dobyski stuff as at least I could figure out what he was trying to do.

The duck section of Races of Glorantha always stuck in my mind as not really understanding what was going on. Disclaimer - Stuart Stansfield has always been my standard for duck art - these were confusing to say the least:

[Mankcam]

Do species even evolve (in a Darwin-sense ) in Glorantha?

Given the mytho-runic nature of Glorantha, an 'evolution of species' based on environmental adaptation seems unlikely 

 

[Yelm's Light]

39 minutes ago, Mankcam said:

Do species even evolve (in a Darwin-sense ) in Glorantha?

Given the mytho-runic nature of Glorantha, an 'evolution of species' based on environmental adaptation seems unlikely 

There's an evolution of knowledge and application at the very least, assuming that those who learn it don't end up going the way of the God Learners.

Mutation is a different question (what's the background radiation level of Glorantha?), but the crucible of Glorantha would seem to be a good place to test survival traits.

I would think that inheritance would still be possible at any rate.  For instance, suitability for breeding (whatever that is for the particular species involved) would tend to be passed on.

[tedopon]

I've always imagined ducks looking like Donald/Howard/Daffy/Scrooge and everyone I've played with has as well. Their silliness is what endears them to me. 

Most of my favorite stuff about Glorantha is the sillier absurd stuff. I like the ethnography stuff just fine, but with limited gaming time I get more mileage from the goofy elements.

A lot of the art from the Mongoose period (and even some of the Avalon Hill/GW era stuff) made them look like horror movie monsters.

We have two ducks in my current game and one of them is the comic relief hero at least once a session.

[Jeff]

4 hours ago, Mankcam said:

Do species even evolve (in a Darwin-sense ) in Glorantha?

Given the mytho-runic nature of Glorantha, an 'evolution of species' based on environmental adaptation seems unlikely 

 

In most cases, species have devolved in Glorantha. God Learner taxonomy is a system of classification based on devolution from original, greater forms to the lesser beings they are now..

[Yelm's Light]

I weary of this whole 'there is no such thing as science' concept.  Every time I've ever presented a scientific rationale there's been someone to contradict me.

[David Scott]

1 hour ago, Yelm's Light said:

I weary of this whole 'there is no such thing as science' concept.  Every time I've ever presented a scientific rationale there's been someone to contradict me.

Perhaps that’s because 'there is no such thing as science' concept’ as we know it in Glorantha. In the real world Glorantha falls very much into the concept of Creationism. It’s an excellent example of mythology creating a world. Science rationale needs a mythological explanation here. This is the key and is explained at the very beginning of the Guide.

[Steve]

4 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

I weary of this whole 'there is no such thing as science' concept.  Every time I've ever presented a scientific rationale there's been someone to contradict me.

Yep, stop trying with the scientific rationales, there's no point.

[Richard S.]

6 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

I weary of this whole 'there is no such thing as science' concept.  Every time I've ever presented a scientific rationale there's been someone to contradict me.

Maybe that's because in Glorantha the physical science that we know and use don't exist? YGMV, but if you're going to discuss something here just know that pretty much no one else plays Glorantha like that.

[simonh]

7 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

I weary of this whole 'there is no such thing as science' concept.  Every time I've ever presented a scientific rationale there's been someone to contradict me.

And everyone’s piling on to contradict you.  

I do think it is possible for Gloranthans to apply rational thinking to understand their world. A Gloranthan could apply the scientific method and get useful results, but the reasons for things in a Glorantha are not the same as the reasons for things in our world. As a result the evidence available to Gloranthans will be different and the conclusions they come to will be different.

Simon Hibbs

[g33k]

7 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

I weary of this whole 'there is no such thing as science' concept.  Every time I've ever presented a scientific rationale there's been someone to contradict me.

YGMV

[styopa]

11 hours ago, Jeff said:

In most cases, species have devolved in Glorantha. God Learner taxonomy is a system of classification based on devolution from original, greater forms to the lesser beings they are now..

Diamond Dwarfs, for example.  Mistress Trolls, for example.  I don't think there's an Aldryami analogue though?  Curious.

10 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

I weary of this whole 'there is no such thing as science' concept.  Every time I've ever presented a scientific rationale there's been someone to contradict me.

Meh, I think you can have a magical world, but rationalism and logic are how humans (in my view) ultimately sort stuff out.  There's still going to be scientists figuring stuff out, just using fire elementals and not bunsen burners.  I still think water boils at a consistent temp across the world, etc. Gravity's a thing.

"Magic" doesn't ipso facto mean science or a scientific approach is worthless.  Heck, I've always approached Western Sorcery and Sorcerers as much more programmatic and rigorous than the "POOF there it is" 'canned magic' that Divine magicians are stuck with.

 

[Jeff]

Just now, styopa said:

Diamond Dwarfs, for example.  Mistress Trolls, for example.  I don't think there's an Aldryami analogue though?  Curious.

Flamal to Great Trees/Dryads to the lesser things that are elves. 

Just now, styopa said:

Meh, I think you can have a magical world, but rationalism and logic are how humans (in my view) ultimately sort stuff out.  There's still going to be scientists figuring stuff out, just using fire elementals and not bunsen burners.  I still think water boils at a consistent temp across the world, etc. Gravity's a thing.

"Magic" doesn't ipso facto mean science or a scientific approach is worthless.  Heck, I've always approached Western Sorcery and Sorcerers as much more programmatic and rigorous than the "POOF there it is" 'canned magic' that Divine magicians are stuck with.

 

The problem isn't rationalism - it is importing modern scientific theories that are not just empirically false for Glorantha but wildly anachronistic as well.

[Yelm's Light]

37 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Flamal to Great Trees/Dryads to the lesser things that are elves. 

The problem isn't rationalism - it is importing modern scientific theories that are not just empirically false for Glorantha but wildly anachronistic as well.

Wait a second...empirically?  In a world without science?  That's funny.

And to your 'devolution' point, what did species devolve from, according to your theory?  What was the 'super race' of men, or bison, or merfolk?

 

10 hours ago, David Scott said:

Perhaps that’s because 'there is no such thing as science' concept’ as we know it in Glorantha. In the real world Glorantha falls very much into the concept of Creationism. It’s an excellent example of mythology creating a world. Science rationale needs a mythological explanation here. This is the key and is explained at the very beginning of the Guide.

I don't care if it's page 1 of RQ.  It's ludicrous to spin myths for every possible thing that could happen on the world.  I suppose everything that is ever learned by a Gloranthan creature is because Lhankor Mhy or some other local god of knowledge smiled down on them.  Give me a break.

[Jeff]

4 minutes ago, Yelm's Light said:

Wait a second...empirically?  In a world without science?  That's funny.

And to your 'devolution' point, what did species devolve from, according to your theory?  What was the 'super race' of men, or bison, or merfolk?

 

I don't care if it's page 1 of RQ.  It's ludicrous to spin myths for every possible thing that could happen on the world.  I suppose everything that is ever learned by a Gloranthan creature is because Lhankor Mhy or some other local god of knowledge smiled down on them.  Give me a break.

I've never said there is no valid logical or empirical understanding of Glorantha. Simply that i's conclusions are very unlikely to resemble modern science with molecules, evolution, gravity, etc.

It is obvious what things have devolved from - the Primal Runes. The Eranaschula. The Primal Runes devolved into Srvuali and combined into Burtae. The Srvuali and Burtae further devolved and combined and eventually you went from pure perfect forms like Aether or Harana Ilor into the wretched things that inhabit the material world today.

[Yelm's Light]

7 minutes ago, Jeff said:

I've never said there is no valid logical or empirical understanding of Glorantha. Simply that i's conclusions are very unlikely to resemble modern science with molecules, evolution, gravity, etc.

It is obvious what things have devolved from - the Primal Runes. The Eranaschula. The Primal Runes devolved into Srvuali and combined into Burtae. The Srvuali and Burtae further devolved and combined and eventually you went from pure perfect forms like Aether or Harana Ilor into the wretched things that inhabit the material world today.

But things just happen to work out mostly the same as in the RW.

According to the Malkioni.  And anyway, combination is not devolution.  What power do Aether and Harana Ilor have 'now,' other than to leave a few runes?  Apotheosis, anyone (Sedenya being the most powerful example)?