[Rq-rules] Mongoose Runequest

[Sven Lugar]

It was the whole tone of a series of emails from you that seemed like 
you felt we were incapable of rendering a fair & honest appraisal. These 
are good reasoned folk & experienced players on this board in my opinion 
(I include you in that - even though I called you on it). If I was 
mistaken on your intent, then I apologize, but it was an honest mistake. 
I have seen a recent edition (I won't say who came to me for my input as 
I don't want to get them in trouble) & was part of the first playtest 
group. Sprange is the company flack I was referring to, btw. His 
treatment of the Steve (who's been my friend since the early 70's - I'm 
very loyal & staunch in my friendships) as well as his comments about 
the original ideas of RQ put the MRQ version beyond the pale for me. Yes 
I do see that some attempt at drawing from RQ, but the overall feel of 
the game has moved into the D20 realm of "mighty-morphing super-gamer" 
rather than the subtlety & finesse required of "Cleaver-Quest" (aka RQ). 
You have D20 extraordinary non-humans rather than a RQ person who rises 
above the crowd by dint of effort, wit & a willingness to take risks 
that could kill or cripple them permanently. From day one of original 
play-testing with Steve (I probably have the only original hand written 
copy left according to Steve) I have loved that in RQ I was required to 
think rather than just cleave & walk to the next room. Thus it is flavor 
& tangibility that I'm speaking of along with some (but not all) of the 
mechanics.

I didn't know if you were with Mongoose or not, nor would it matter to 
me in that I always try to speak plainly. I think it was more of the way 
Mongoose handled the open playtesters rather than the concept of open 
play-testing. The DBRP experience has gone much better & been much more 
open - yes it's delayed by the lead writer having to move across country 
& start a new job in the middle. It's being very successful & inviting 
for even the most minor of criticism & correction. It's turning into a 
fine game that I'm willing to have my name be a part of it. I've even 
written a mythological scenario for it that is up for inclusion in the 
first scenario release. - That's how playable I feel it is. To me it is 
a matter of management.

takk,
Sven

Thomas Zunder wrote:

> Sven, darling, how could you think I was dismissive or insulting? I  
> simply said 'let us not be grumpy old men' and dismiss the game out  
> of hand when it is a valid incarnation of RQ. How can you say you  
> have given it a fair trial and then claim it is a d20 variant, when  
> it is definitely a BRP variant. Could I ask which version of the  
> rules you gave it a fair chance with? Again this suggests to me that  
> trying an open playtest was a mistake that a game company shouldn't  
> make again. By the way, Sven, sweetheart, did you think I worked for  
> Mongoose? Oh dear, you should be with me when I lay into Sprange at  
> Continuum 2006 tonight.. I don't think MRQ is great, but it is  
> competent and some of the differences may actually make it a fun game  
> for some rpg-ers..
>
> On 28 Jul 2006, at 02:53, Sven Lugar wrote:
>
>> Despite your dismissive & deriding comments (bordering on insulting  
>> - but that's been par for Mongoose) of those of us who don't feel  
>> the way the "Company Flack" does, we have given MRQ a fair trial &  
>> we found it wanting. I prefer to be a "grumpy old man" & either use  
>> my old copies or use DBRP which so far seems to integrate the  
>> original with it's variants in its mechanics & spirit. If I wanted  
>> to play a D20 variant (despite Mongoose labeling it RuneQuest), I  
>> would buy a D20 variant.
>>
>> Takk,
>> Sven
>>
>> Thomas Zunder wrote:
>>
>>> No, it's very much RuneQuest. Not quite the same, but definitely a  RQ.
>>> We need to decide, do we want to be grumpy ld men or not?
>>> Give it a fair trial, forget the playtest, see how it plays..
>>>
>>> On 27 Jul 2006, at 16:04, Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>> One of the key concepts of the original RQ was that everybody  
>>>>> had  access
>>>>> to some kind of magic for their daily lives. I wonder how they  
>>>>> can  call
>>>>> it RuneQuest if this isn't the case.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Because Mongoose have paid Issaries Inc a tidy sum (with probably  
>>>> a  per
>>>> book component) for the right to use the Trademark...
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Nick Middleton
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RQ-Rules mailing list
>>>> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
>>>> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RQ-Rules mailing list
>>> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
>>> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RQ-Rules mailing list
>> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
>> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RQ-Rules mailing list
> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>