From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Thu, 02 Sep 1993, part 2
Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily)
Sender: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM
Precedence: junk
The RuneQuest Daily and RuneQuest Digest deal with the subjects of
Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha.
Send submissions and followup to "RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM",
they will automatically be included in a next issue. Try to change the
Subject: line from the default Re: RuneQuest Daily... on replying.
Selected articles may also appear in a regular Digest. If you
want to submit articles to the Digest only, contact the editor at
RuneQuest-Digest-Editor@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM.
Send enquiries and Subscription Requests to the editor:
RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Henk Langeveld)
---------------------
From: C442196@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu (Newton Hughes)
Subject: rq lite argument
Message-ID: <9308301932.AA28699@Sun.COM>
Date: 30 Aug 93 19:29:33 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1496
What I see in the daily all the time is, "Let's pitch this rqlite
thing to the GMs out there." I am wondering if that's such a hot idea.
There's also a rq rules lynch mob forming, to wipe out things like
fatigue, knockback, hit locations, etc., in a lite version.
My own experience trying to recruit my munchkin friends to rq was not
encouraging. I had to simultaneously talk them through a complex
character generation system, explain complicated combat rules, lists
of skills and spells, and somehow try to explain how religious cults
worked. The first 2 items were painful enough, but the last item
proved to be almost insurmountable, because everyone in the group
had the d&d assumption that religion = morality and differences
between religions are drawn along lines of "alignment."
What if the rqlite book was pitched to players, not gms, and included,
along with the simplified rules, character generation for Dragon Pass,
intros to the coolest cults (i.e., Urox, not Ernalda!), tips on weird
cultures, etc.? If a player bought it, it would help him get accli-
mated to the world without driving the gm nuts; if the gm bought it,
it would help him explain the world to new players. And if every
gm has 4 players your potential market would be multiplied by five.
I was sorry not to hear more answers in the daily to the excellent
question, "How do you explain Glorantha to outsiders?" My own
answer would be that it's the only frp world designed by a practic-
ing shaman. I would also make a comparison to the works of Jack
Vance, but today's generation of munchkins doesn't recognize him.
About the lynch mob: I don't have any major problem with the rq3
rules on things like knockback, hit locations, etc., because the
worst thing that can happen is the group thinks the rules are too
tough or dumb or whatever and plays the game without them. Nobody
is going to give up on rq because it has hit locations. You can
still make the game work without them and it's no big deal. On the
other hand, there are rules that are critical to the system, that
can't be dropped, and if those rules are bad it ruins everything.
Take rq3's skill increase system. My players wanted to know, "OK,
if I spend x lunars and y time starting from z%, how big an increase
do I get?" and there's no easy answer. We were willing to spend some
extra time resolving combat because it's dramatic, but waste time
on out-of-game number-crunching bookkeeping? No way.
The reason a game like ad&d succeeds isn't because every single
rule is perfect, but because the critical ones are comprehensible
and playable. Rq3 fails because the parts of the rules players
need most often (character generation, skill increase, initiative
and actions per round) are the most convoluted and unplayable.
In summation, I don't know whether to favor rqlite or not. If it's
just going to be one more thing for the gm to buy, and it's just
there to tell people that they don't have to use hit locations if
they don't want to, then forget it.
Only if it's going to have a new angle that will attract people
to Glorantha do I see any point in it.
nh
---------------------
From: Brian.Curley@ccmail.adp.wisc.edu (Brian CURLEY)
Subject: Comments Re: RQLite
Message-ID: <9307307467.AA746761530@ccmail.adp.wisc.edu>
Date: 31 Aug 93 00:45:30 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1497
OK. I think it's time for a newcomer to chime in here. I have been reading, with
some degree of confusion, the ongoing discussion of RQLite or RQIV (or what have
you). Just to put my $.02 in:
a) I never found RQII to be that confusing. RQIII was another kettle of fish
however. But both are still a long stride above the morass that drifts from the
game-mills of Lake Geneva. I'm sure many of you have actually played AD&D, but
if you really think the system is that user friendly, maybe you need to go back
and re-read the rules again. Good luck, and leave a trail of bread crumbs.
b) In Saturday's Daily (8/28) someone made comments regarding what they think
the RQLite Combat rules should look like:
>Combat
>-----
>
>No strike ranks or hit locations. Just a streight DEX based initiative system.
>Maybe a "major wound" system with a table of effects. Not too deadly either.
>Personaly I think a game which leaves maimed and crippled PCs littering
>the battlefield is not a good idea.
>Some people have stated that AD&D is near ideal with just HP, AC and THAC0.
>Well, RQ just needs HPs, APs and skill percentages. Big deal.
Not I may be the only one with this experience, but *everyone* I know says that
the RQ Combat system is one of it's biggest strengths. The players and GMs I
know find that a system in which combat is DANGEROUS (i.e. you can be killed at
any time) and more detailed, and which values that fact that some weapons simply
allow for faster (or more frequent) actions is far preferable to one which
values only lucky dice rolling.
My purpose here is not to bash the AD&D system, but rather to point out that a
lot of what's been said on this subject seems to advocate making RQ more like
AD&D. I for one, would rather see the entire thing go out of print than let that
happen.
c) I am also a little surprised at the number of people who are of the opinion
that RQ is difficult to teach to new players. I say that it is no more difficult
than teaching AD&D to someone who has never played that system. Like all RPGs,
as long as the GM understands the system, and shows a little patience with the
players, they'll catch on. Simply slapping the Player's Book and the Magic Book
down in front of them and saying "OK...create a PC" isn't going to cut it.
As for RQLite vs RQIV vs AD&D...it's time to face reality. RQ will, in all
likelihood, never shake or even threaten TSR's near-stranglehold on the Fantasy
RPG market. RQ has a small but rabidly loyal following and I believe Avalon Hill
knew this when they licensed it from Chaosium. And I don't think a larger output
from AH is going to change that significantly. If you want to see RQ grow, then
take it on yourself to increase the RQ presence in the gaming world. If there's
a local con, run a RQ game...or better yet, run two or three. There are a lot of
independent RPG magazines in publication now, and they'd probably be glad to hav
e a RQ adventure or two to publish. You won't make a mint, but you will increase
the RQ presence.
Finally, if you're really serious about increasing RQ's share of the FRPG
market, put up a sign in the local hobby shop and start a campaign. Now I know
this is preaching to the converted, but that's really the only way to do it.
Most people learn D&D from people they know, and then they keep playing it
because it's easier than learning a new system. But if we show them the
strengths of the system, then hopefully they'll do the same to someone else and
so on...
That's exactly how I came to love RQ. Some guy named Mike Dawson made me play it
about 10 years ago, and I owe him a lot for that.
OK...I'll shut up now...
Brian
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
x Brian.Curley@ccmail.adp.wisc.edu
x
x "Just when you think no one knows you're alive, try missing x
x a few car payments" -- author unknown
x
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---------------------
From: gbailey@aol.com
Subject: RQLite, sorcery
Message-ID: <9308302128.tn11530@aol.com>
Date: 31 Aug 93 01:28:05 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1498
RQLite:
Please keep attack and defense rolls, that is one of the unique things about
RQ. I would keep weapon damage rolls, that's one of the "pleasures" of doing
combat (especially for munchkins). Re-word and modify the strike rank
system, after all AD&D uses something vaguely similar (10 segments per
round). Keep sorcery, but have a simple spell list (maybe have the spell
building rules in an appendix). Have 5-6 simple cults: 1-2 warrior
(civilized and barbarian/primitive?), 1 "thief", 1 healer/earth/nature, 1,
mercenary/"adventurer", 1 "evil/chaos" (think of the restrictive game
mechanics: class and alignment); keep each to one page with a philosophy,
duties, restrictions, benefits, rankings.
Sorcery: yes, I would like to see other people's sorcery rules. I think RQ
sorcery (magic in general) suffers in "showiness". No big fire balls or
fantastic illusions unless you're VERY powerful. Nothing for medium level
sorcerers. And attack spells are Palsy and Venom? They seem pathetic and
wimpy (I know they don't have to be).
Glen