Andrew E. Larsen
On Dec 20, 2011, at 11:59 AM, bernuetz <bernuetz_at_WqtiUBptvg3_NoVOdYunsbS15iliwMYvb2QasqzYqniwtccwi_-jJl3dCajjz8QLzhEQsUhERaT1Dg.yahoo.invalid> wrote:
> As a fan of RuneQuest I'm really getting tired of the seemingly constant jibes against it. Just because it's a different approach to Glorantha doesn't make it worse. It's a bit rich and frankly insulting to assume that with the advent of HeroQuest Glorantha is so much better. If I were inclined to run a HQ campaign (which I'm not) I could make it as rigid and lifeless as I wanted and stick by what the books state. Conversely I could make a RQ campaign as rich and variable as any HQ campaign if I wanted. It's not the system that makes the world.
>
> RQ presents a more structured approach to Glorantha and role-playing which is what a lot of people want. You never have to be rigid in your use of it. If I want to make my vampires pink with gauzy wings the size of a person's hand I can do that but if I want to I can go by the book too.
>
> Just like in HQ I can put as much thought and customization into my campaign as I want or have time to. I can even wing it and make stuff up as I go along (just ask my players). The amount of background and thought about how things are the way they are doesn't change just because I'm running a different system.
>
> When I write a myth about Glorantha (and I've done a few) I'm not writing it with RQ in mind but Glorantha.
>
> It's fine to state that HQ has a different approach from RQ but please try and be less dismissive of it. Last I checked this was the World of Glorantha group.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Oliver
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Powered by hypermail