Re: G:tG rules

From: Joerg Baumgartner <joe_at_toppoint.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 96 19:01 MET DST


Jim Chapin
>Judging by the comments on this line, I must be in the minority of
>Gloranthaphiles who is not particularly a fan of Pendragon. The combat
>system of Pendragon is too quick and not particularly interesting -- the
>characteristic table is irritatingly simple-minded and vastly reduces the
>chance for role-playing.

This covers my experiences as a player as well.

>The greatest weakness of RQ rules for Gloranthan reality (and even more
>for Alternate Earth) is that the system is too magic-heavy.

Not really magic-heavy, but magic has been mechanized by its description as quite instant, reliable and physically measurable spells, for everybody.

>So my wish list for Mr. Hall is a combat system which is more interesting
>than that of Pendragon, and some way of using the trait list better --
>perhaps a more subtle set of lists, and certainly a less constraining way
of >using the traits.

I'll add my voice to Jim's with this appeal. Though I will most likely end up with a homebrew sythesis of both systems. Be honest: who won't retain those personal favourite bits of RQ for the new system, or vice versa? We will end up with a range of DIY mixes between the systems.


End of Glorantha Digest V3 #181


WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html

Powered by hypermail