While I can understand the desire, I think there are a few counter-points to consider:
1. We need a financially healthy publisher at the center of Gloranthan publishing. We haven't had one of those -- apart from Mongoose -- for years. I trust Rick's business judgment. If he believes that the right business strategy to give Moon Design a chance is to do Sartar, Pavis, Whitewall, and Prax, then that's the strategy I support. 2. One of the problems with HQ1 was the focus on deep gaming stuff and complexity. We need those same materials to be reworked to appeal to new players. 3. Even when materials get reworked, new stuff comes along. There is plenty of new stuff in Sartar. I can't speak for Whitewall or Pavis. I have a lot of new stuff that I am writing in the Prax book.
> Instead we get told 'don't do anything just yet as there is new information coming out'....
> and then when it finally appears after hiatus after hiatus its just a re-hack of the same
> stuff that, yes we loved for Sartar, but really did we need to regurgitate it for Heortland? I say not.
I think, to understand part of the reason for the "you might not want to do anything" kind of sense, you have to think back to the howls that when up when Elmal first came to light. I think Jeff is trying to head off Gregging things that he knows, the moment they are said, will get Gregged based on what he's already written. His way of doing it might or might not be the ideal approach from any one person's perspective. But you have to admit its definitely getting stuck between a rock and a hard place.
> I think you are putting words in my mouth Ian, and I find your tone is unnecessarily snippy.
To be fair, though you may not have intended the tone that I (at least) read into your email, it seemed like Ian was responding in kind. The words in your email that seemed to project that tone were "pet projects" and "re-hack" and "regurgitate." Those are pretty derogatory terms. I can see how someone involved in writing the Sartar book would take that as a punch to the gut.
> My view is just on what I see as an outsider.
So, wouldn't our common ignorance of the actual motives involved counsel that we not ascribe motives to those involved?
John:
> In one fell swoop, Jeff's announcement of grandiose and long-term
Surely this has been a problem ever since Issaries came out with HeroWars? Whenever a new round of publishing effort started, it deterred informal efforts. But it also spurred on others. Sons of Kargzant, Tarsh Wars, Thieves' Arm, etc. And I think that, with the publication of Sartar, we can see that the core book for each area is going to be a big summation of material into playable form. If you've been writing for those areas, your material is probably not getting Gregged. Whitewall might be an exception to that because it is less of a setting and more of an event.
> Again, and perhaps unintentionally, the drift away from an rpg
> emphasis over the last four years (no campaign modules, abandonment
> of Sartar Rising arc) to a more background essay/collectors emphasis
> and a re-emergent Gloranthan fundamentalism of the OTG 'there are
> five Death Lords in Dragon Pass' variety have at times overshadowed
> the creative roleplaying spark that made Glorantha great.
I certainly agree with decryng the lack of campaign modules. But you have to admit that they are a lot of work and don't sell all that well. One of the benefits (to me, at least) of HQ2 is that it makes writing scenarios easier because you don't have to come up with ability numbers and test whether they are right.
I don't think that the idea that the current set of books will have a "background essay/collectors emphasis" is accurate. The second chapter in the Sartar Book is character generation. The first is a short introduction to the world and to Sartar that is appropriate to a new player. The last quarter of the book is an introductory campaign arc. The gods that get covered in the middle are ones that have traditionally appealed to players.
Two problems with the Sartar Rising series: First, they trap your player into playing subordinates. Second, you can't be Argrath. Maybe those are the same problem. It's one solution to an incredibly difficult problem of how to handle Argrath. I think that the authors of the new materials intend to avoid that solution. I have a section outlined in the Prax book called "Are you Argrath?" giving the narrator advice on deciding early whether or not your group wants to keep that option open and how to handle some of the scenes that occur so as to keep options open. It will be up to Jeff as to whether that stays in the book, but I understand it to be consistent with his direction.
Chris
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Powered by hypermail