People that want to
> play Superhero-level Glorantha have had the rules with which to do
so for
> what, 7 years or so now? Yes, I'll admit that there are problems
with the
> rules, but *your* basic mechanics are fexible enough to allow it.
And yet, I
> hear of few basic-abilities-at 4-mastery campaigns. You might ask
why *this*
While I usually don't advance this perspective, I would like to point out that the general trend for commercially successful (lots o' fans) FRPGs is to have either a significant power boost over previous editions (like D&D) or to have PCs as powerful demi-gods from the word go (like Exalted).
I would challenge your assertion that newbie players enjoy low-level gaming. Today's new players want to be able to play something cool, and they equate coolness with successful and powerful characters.
It's only the gnarly grognards like us, Roderick, that have been reared on RQII, Traveller, old D&D and the like that appreciate the heroic virtues of struggling vs. overwhelming odds. Most kids today just want to win.
When I introduce new players to Glorantha via HeroQuest, my success with them seems to correspond to their power level, and how much I am able to restrain my urge to give them reams of background material. You and I might cast aspersions at newbs playing hero level characters without understanding and appreciating the richness of Glorantha, but the newbs don't care; to paraphrase the immortal words of Cyndi Lauper, `newbs just want to have fun'.
The commercially successful definition of fun seems to include a higher level of initial power as the standard. Robin wouldn't be doing his job well if he did not take that into account.
Are there people out there with differing interpretations of fun? Sure. That's my only problem with oft-raised battle standard of MGF – one person's fun is another person's piss-pot.
Doyle
Powered by hypermail