Re: The Glorantha Digest V6 #101

From: Bruce Mason <MasonB_at_cardiff.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 10:16:23 GMT0BST


From: Brian Tickler <tickler_at_netcom.com>

> Digest aquaintances notwithstanding, most of the gamers I know who've played
> in RQ/Glorantha are of the opinion that RQ (the system) was at least as
> much a factor in the initial success of the RQ2 as Glorantha (the world), if
> not more so...in the early 80's there were several factors that drew
> people over from D&D:
>
> 1. Realistic combat system instead of abstract hit points/armor class
> 2. Everybody gets magic/skills
> 3. Small, well-fleshed-out area to play in (Dragon Pass/Prax)
> 4. Cults, which were a big step up from picking an alignment and a
> god/goddess in D&D
> 5. Playing Trolls

Well in the UK I think the fact that the boxed set of RQ2 cost just L7 was a huge plus. It was also extensively plugged in White Dwarf. At base it was a quick and simple system. I know I had never done any roleplaying before, got it for Christmas and ran the first part of Apple Lane with a drunken family on Decmber 26. The appeal of Apple Lane should not be underestimated, it was a scenario pack that tantalized people who played it about the world around.

Compare with the awful mess that was RQ3. In the UK cost L38, 400% price rise, was shoddily produced had a ludicrous scenario and all the charm of a sceptic warthog. Apart from the wind strength table. I loved that table. It was one of the funniest collections of numbers I've seen in my life.

Ah well.

Powered by hypermail