- ttrotsky2 <TTrotsky_at_bucsXEmD9QZ-pL978QwqI6jPE6hZNoUzBgHj51tq4UQyE3b0g7I2Bp8PffxdaHU0t9Lo55gGZWOSRcsxWNLT8Q.yahoo.invalid> wrote:
> This isn't a criticism - if I was an MRQ player,
> there are a number of
> HQ supplements I'd have no interest in. Doubly so if
> my campaign was set
> in the 2nd Age! Its also in the nature of MRQ that
> its supplements will
> have more rules in them than comparable HQ ones
> would, so that's fair
> enough. You gets what you pays for, and you can't
> really expect MRQ
> books to be much use to the typical HQ GM, or vice
> versa. At least, I
> didn't expect it. It's a different system, after
> all.
True, but I play in a RQ game, and we'd considered
swapping from RQ3 to MRQ. We bought the rule book.
Then we discovered we needed a load more books to get
a useable system. We're sticking to RQ3.
What kind of emailer are you? Find out today - get a free analysis of your email personality. Take the quiz at the Yahoo! Mail Championship.
http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://mail.yahoo.net/uk