[Rq-rules] RE: still sick of Glorantha?

[Frank Filz]

Stephen Posey wrote:
> andrep wrote:
>> Peter said,
>>
>>> So...am I the only person on the list who's still sick of Glorantha?
>>
>> Nope...have RQ/BRP'd many years, read most the Gloranthan
>> supplements, but have never been inspired to set foot there.
>
> Ditto, I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one.
>
> I enjoy reading about Glorantha in relatively small doses (the
> Biturian Varosh sidebars in the old Cults of Prax is about right),
> long lists of Pavic kings and timelines of events in the Lunar Empire
> generally leave me cold.
>
> And I have little interest in playing in Glorantha.  If I want a
> really immersive and convincing alternate world, I'd pick Tekumel over
> Glorantha any day.

Hmm, I've been coming to the conclusion that Glorantha is a better gaming 
world than Tekumel.

Of course part of that is I have little interest in running the sort of 
political intrique which is what Tekumel really seems to be about. One 
serious problem I have with Tekumel is how static it is. I also find that 
Glorantha provides far more opportunities for adventure. Another problem 
with Tekumel is the alienness of it. You just can't fall back on your 
knowledge of Earth, whereas Glorantha, while it has some really alien 
things, is pretty European in nature.

I tend to agree with you though that long lists of ancient kings and such 
aren't all that useful to play. But that's only characteristic of the newer 
material. The 1st/2nd./3rd edition stuff is all well focused on stuff of 
interest to adventurers.

Frank