The reason I picked the comparision I did was not to compare "fair" products, but to compare 2 products that Chaosium could come out with in roughly the same timeframe given where they are today. At least, I assume that Chaosium could repackage Pavis, create a new scenario book, and place it in the box by sometime in '99...I was trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I suspect they could repackage both Pavis *and* Big Rubble, both with new scenario books, by the time HW would be out...
> << Glorantha is a great world, however, it is not good enough to stand on its
> own as HW will force it to do. Find me a copy of a Glorantha-based work of
> fiction in any bookstore that's not in the gaming section and I could be
> persuaded to change my mind... :)>>
>
> Issaries intend to sell Gloranthan fiction through the book trade as well
> as through normal gaming outlets. They have apparently had positive responses
> to this, so it could very well be on the horizon.
Well, the success of this all depends on quality...narratives ala "Biturian Varosh" would seem to a whole lot more viable than offerings like King of Sartar...
> Just out of interest, is this just general gloom (and if it is, you're
> clearly entitled to your opinions and there isn't really a lot of point
> arguing about it at length) or do you have suggestions as to how the situation
> could be improved? Given that RQ isn't profitable enough to be sold at
> present, that is.
I'd like to revise your last statement to "RQ as produced by AH/Chaosium since the mid '80s isn't profitable enough" before I dive in here...
Here's 2 ways to save Glorantha that have a better shot than HW alone IMO:
Yes, yes, you all think I'm crazy, but you see I actually believe that the quality of RQ as rules set had very little to do with its demise.
> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 00:18:09 +0100 (BST)
> From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
> Subject: The Ticklish question of RQ...
>
> If that's true, then Glorantha is a dead durulz in the not-so-long term,
> either way. That being so, why is it going to be worth Issaries, Inc's
> while trying to go the enormously unlikely looking RQ route? Are you
> _seriously_ suggesting that they flush the work commissioned on HW,
> spend what one can only speculate is likely to be an enormous quantity
> of cash to regain the IPR[*], and hope against hope that a warmed-over
> version of a 20-year old game will do what a new system won't?
I'd say it's the fan's who are purchasing shares that are shouldering the lion's share of the risk here. HW would serve just fine as a RQ supplement (Chaosium has been not-so-subtly positioning it that way for the current fan base anyway).
Powered by hypermail