Quote:
Originally Posted by smascrns
I don't consider myself a MRQ detractor. On the contrary, I had high hopes about it but these just didn't materialise. I tried to explain why, that's all.
Nothing against that but then, why retain the characteristics at all? I mean, why having characteristics with such a limited usage? They are there mostly for two purposes: Determining the initial value of the skills; determining the attributes. Other then this they serve almost no purpose. If that's so, why not drop them altogether? Note: I don't expect an answer from you as much as to vent my puzzlement on this design option.
(If I ever run RQ again I'll use my own house rule for this purpose.) Back to the issue, my main issues are about the combination of SR and action phases, on one side; and the fact that the rules don't take into account things that were present in the past editions and that made sense to factor into SR. Personaly I don't see any major advantage in a system when compared to the other at the game table, but MRQ is very, very illogical, and that's something that interfers with my own ability for "suspention of diesbelief".
I couldn't agree more. The problem is that INT in MRQ (as in RQ and most games) does not measure instinct, on the contrary it measures conscious thinking. So, the impact of INT in SR should be negative but this is the exact reverse of what the rules dictate.
I'm sure you're right. But then, if RQ had been reduced to the fixation of nothing else than "a very vocal minority", why did Mongoose go for the RQ? Brand? Why did Mongoose start the game development cycle by asking for the input and support of that "very vocal minority"? Why did Mongoose work MRQ from going back to the old and outdated game preferred by that "very vocal minority"? If there was nothing to gain from picking the RuneQuest brand, the Glorantha link and working from the RQ ruleset, why did Mongoose do it?
You forget that RuneQuest remained a lurking and lively OOP game due to that "very vocal minority". It was their continuous support that kept the brand with enough notoriety to be a commercial asset today. It was their continuous support that made the RQ ruleset worth looking at as the basis for the development of a new game.
That "very vocal minority" is perfectly justified for the flack. Needless to say, Mongoose has also all the legitimacy to do as it did, but it has to accept the flack with grace.
I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else of anything in particular. I'm just giving a perspective for people to evaluate the two games, and next decide on which they want to play, that's all.
|
With regards to why they dont' drop the attributes all together, I rather imagine it is for the same reason that D&D does not do the same, even though for the most part the D&D system isnow a +5/-5 measuring system. Also, the system does record attribute damage and reduction, and while it's not implicit, having the skills present can provide a good measure of role-playing and comparison. In my own example, for example, you need both an athletics skill and a STR attribute to develop one character who is athletic and lean vs. another who is brawny and undeveloped. So I don't think the attributes are either unnecessary or useless....you just need to think a bit ore broadly on their application here.
Screw the Vocal Minority. I am one of the Nonvocal Majority who kept interest in this effin game for the last twenty five years and I take umbrage that a few loudmouths who can't seem to get it across their noggins' that they are not stating The Truth when they evoke their opinions on a game, merely Their Opinions. I'm so sick and tired of this. Nothing personal against you, but I feel sleighted. I guess I'm not a real Runequest fan if I don't lay on the hate against Mongoose and the fact that they didn't sculpt the game exactly the way the 80-odd people who have too much time on their hands and too much of a fixation on trying to ram their opinions about this game down the rest of our throats about how awful it is while the rest of the Nonvocal Majority of RQ fans are simply playing and enjoying the game. Nuff said. I anjoy RQ for the games I play with it, not the debates. The hardcores need to get over themselves and go beat some other dead horse.
EDIT: I really don't mean to come off coarse here, but I consider the constant attacks against this game to be simply counter productive and maningless. It might be a problem with our hobby in general, though.....or just the RPG.net crowd, I don't know (I base this idea on how much flack the D&D 4E game seems to b egetting). Think it's time for another break from rpg.net, sorry I'm feeling so pissy. I just find that every time someone analyzes a game without playing it, then tries hard to explain to me why I am not having fun in my weekly MRQ campaign from their formal opinion that you can experience a game system without playing it, leads me to wonder just who, among us all, is really in the hobby to actually play games anymore.