<< Official Glorantha is bad. There should be "Glorantha stuff from Issaries, Inc.", but without some kind of authoritarian "official" stamp that smacks of TSR-ish One-True-Worldism.>>
The fact that Issaries material will be called 'official', just as Chaosium material was, doesn't imply there's anything wrong with 'unofficial' material and Greg has said as much several times. If you want to get a scenario published by Issaries that relies on the Lunar Empire re-conquering Sartar in 1630, you would, quite reasonably, find that difficult. But I don't believe Chaosium could care less what you do in your own campaign, and (as I understand it) have nothing against unofficial material being published so long as it doesn't break their trademark and copyright privelages - although I believe that in practice this may only apply to magazines with a greater than annual frequency.
<< > Yeah, that's a very good way to view it, like a set of lost histories
from a
> magical, wonderful world. Now, *that's* Glorantha.
Too bad Issaries, Inc., is going to stamp all that out with "Official Glorantha". >>
I'm not at all sure where you've got this idea from. I can only assume you're referring to the 1620-1630 Campaign Book, which hasn't even been written yet. When it is, I'd be willing to bet the introduction includes phrases like 'feel free to ignore any of this if it doesn't suit your campaign' and 'events in this chronicle may be changed by the actions of player characters'.
Even if they didn't, you could always ignore them, so its hardly 'stamping out'.
Forward the glorious Red Army!
Trotsky
Powered by hypermail