> I'm seeing two mutually contradictory propositions getting violent
> agreement in the forums:
>
> 1. "Rules don't matter"
>
> and
>
> 2. "HQ models Glorantha better than RQ".
>
> Pick one.
How about "rules don't matter... as much as the anoraks think they do". Yes, you need some agreed reference points which I guess we can call 'rules', but we can just as easily call them 'guidelines'. 'Rules' imply a law that must be followed or something bad might happen. Guidelines on the other hand, no one ever went to prison for not following the guidelines.
HQ can model Glorantha better than RQ, but that doesn't mean I have to accept the HQ rules verbatim when I play. I normally just wing it anyway, using anything and everthing that helps me narrate the best game I can. Holding a book of strictures as sacrosanct is for religions not roleplayers. As Simon has said I tried PDP (a system which I still have a soft spot for) but it didn't suit my players so we switched to HQ. I played HQ with another group of players and they wanted to switch to RQ. Our current group play HQ and RQ. So rules matter only in as much as they need to suit your players, gaming style and campaign setting. Then, if they are a particularly well suited rules system, you can forget about them...... unless you are an anorak of course in which case you must then start worshipping them as dogma :o)
Darren
Powered by hypermail