Incidentally, while Call of Cthulhu feels too gritty (and, I would argue, a bit too purely sim) for Gloranthan play, so I wouldn't want to use it for that, it does at least have the right level of rules complexity for my tastes - an area where games like MRQ and Burning Wheel (from my reading of reviews and adverts for that game) fall down.
> So as well as games that are familiar to this list because of its focus like MRQ and HQ I am seeing mentions of: Burning Wheel, In a Wicked Age, Don't Rest Your Head, Dogs In The Vineyard, D&D 4e, My Life With Master.
>
> So I'm interested in posting a question out to those who read more than they play? How many of these games do you read?
I've never read any of those, although I've certainly read a lot about
all of them. (Albeit, in a couple of cases, only recently).
> If you don't read them, how much do you think that influences your perception of what the 'state of the art' in tabletop games is?
Actually not much, because I've read enough about them to get a pretty good idea of what they're trying to do, which I suspect is the important part. If I hadn't heard of any of them, or knew almost nothing about them, it would be a different matter, but that's not the case. It's actually rather depressing, in that none of them seem to be the kind of thing I really enjoy, and one wonders what's being done for my corner of the market these days. (Incidentally, I'd try any of them once, if someone else were running, and some of them look quite good for the occasional one-off session; they're just not something that appeals to me enough to want to spend money on).
-- Trotsky Gamer and Skeptic ------------------------------------------------------ Trotsky's RPG website: http://www.ttrotsky.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ Not a Dead Communist: http://jrevell.blogspot.com/
Powered by hypermail