I said:
>>I guess you don't mean that unlike Greg's works, the fan stuff is actually
>>coherent, readable, gameable, and entertaining?
Martin:
>You really think that GRoY, FS and Entekosiad is unreadable and lacking in
>gaming concepts?
Yes. Give me a Pavis/Big Rubble, Borderlands, Cults of Prax or a back issue of Tales or Tradetalk any day.
>I think the stuff is a great basis for the Empires many
>cultures, myths and history.
Doesn't necessarily make it coherent, readable, gameable, or entertaining.
>I only wish he wrote more.
Me too. Give me a Pavis/Big Rubble, Borderlands, Cults of Prax...
>We've read the tomes dozens of times now as we work to create the
>cults for SGU. Often I find something new I hadn't seen before and this
>shows that it is a great creative work IMO.
Yes, we've done the same, and turned the material into stuff that the majority of punters seem to have found enjoyable to read or play. Still doesn't necessarily mean that the original source was coherent, readable, gameable, or entertaining.
>In other words, I've retconned my own work for HW. Casulaties of war.
I suggest there there are far greater implications when you retcon someone elses' work rather than your own.
>>Do I disagree with the "Gods and Goddesses" section?
>>Maybe you can quote me from somewhere on that - I certainly can't remember
>>having *any* view on it one way or another.
>Perhaps it was NIck. Sorry if I misquoted or misremembered.
No worries.
>Because at the Chicago con some comments were made by RM folk that it was
>plain wrong.
I wasn't at the Chicago Con (it's in fact the only English-speaking con I have missed, other than the first Convulsion way back when).
>>looking at the article just now, it looks like the same sort
>>of dull, unfinished stuff that Greg's been churning out for years.
>Amazing. I thought it fascinating. Truly the first glimpse of the article
>way back fasinated me. Who were these new cults? What do they represent?
>So the Empire is more than the Lunar cults! I was immediately interested in
>the possibilities. I think most of the Seattle crowd were too, it helped us
>hugely when we did Enc 1 and Shargash stuff.
Yes, and the tattoos on Stafford's arm are fascinating too. Just because they're fascinating still doesn't make them coherent, readable, gameable, and entertaining. Like us, you had to use one of Greg's characteristically inchoate texts to create far more accessible material of your own (and as I've said, damn fine stuff it is).
>>Certainly his "The Lunar Pantheon" in "A Rough Guide to Glamour" is a far
>>better read, and much more gameable (co-authors for that one: Nick and
Sandy).
>We'll just have to agree to not.
Aye, there's the rub. It is a personal disappointment to me that Stafford and the man he selected as his "Lunar Expert" now appear to be largely uninterested in the wealth of Lunar material that has already been widely used and enjoyed by many. Of course, much of it was created by the lads at Reaching Moon Megacorp, those same lads who largely kept Glorantha a going concern during the grim 90's while Chaosium/Avalon Hill/Stratelibri/Issaries Inc couldn't get their collective shit together. Curiously, not a single person identified with Reaching Moon was made into one of Greg's "experts"; David Hall himself only found about the whole concept by second hand. But I'd prefer my conspiracy theories in my games, thank you.
>>But by this comment I do see
>>that you do hubristically consider current Glorantha fans will be but a
>>piddling minority in a huge HW market, and thus of no consequence.
>No I don't, they will be the core, but in truth, most of the new players
will
>have no clue as to this argument we are having and no knowledge of it or
even
>a care. Only we few, we happy few, we band of Gloranthaphiles can be
>bothered.
Well, I for one am rapidly reaching the point where I can't be bothered any more...
Nick:
>Somebody tell me: why did we bother?
>
>And why should we ever bother again?
Hear, hear!
Cheers,
MOB
Powered by hypermail