|
|
Post by Falconer on Feb 28, 2016 11:34:49 GMT -6
I just got my PDF of RQ1 (which I got from backing the RQ2 Kickstarter). I haven’t really sunk my teeth into it, yet, but, I really dig it! It’s very similar to RQ2, though obviously more primitive. The layout has a bit more of that homemade look, some things like the order of ability scores is almost exactly as in OD&D (Wisdom just replaced with Power).
|
|
arkansan
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 229
|
Post by arkansan on Feb 28, 2016 18:09:26 GMT -6
Will the pdf be made avalible for those that didn't back the kickstarter?
|
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Feb 28, 2016 20:35:20 GMT -6
I’m sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Feb 29, 2016 3:52:47 GMT -6
It will be on Lulu later, too. Pity the PDF is not OCR, but I can see why - the appeal is probably very limited. However, I have found more differences compared to RQ2 than I expected.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 2, 2016 21:11:58 GMT -6
My RQ1 seems very similar to my RQ2 except it's stapled rather than perfect bound and has some of the errata fixed. I don't like to open it too often though as bits fall out of it every time I do.  |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Mar 15, 2016 14:36:19 GMT -6
It’s on DTRPG.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 16, 2016 10:39:13 GMT -6
What I like most about my copy of RQ1 is that when I read it I get a similar feel to ODE&D, FFC, early T&T and the like.
Modern-day rulebooks are so textbook-like and sterile, early rulebooks are more conversational and alive. Admittedly, early rulebooks tend to have more contradictions, errata, misinterpretations, and so on, but I like reading them better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Mar 16, 2016 13:11:36 GMT -6
What I like most about my copy of RQ1 is that when I read it I get a similar feel to ODE&D, FFC, early T&T and the like. Modern-day rulebooks are so textbook-like and sterile, early rulebooks are more conversational and alive. Admittedly, early rulebooks tend to have more contradictions, errata, misinterpretations, and so on, but I like reading them better. Great point. I just took a look at the preview of the RQ1 pdf - trying to decide whether to get it since I got the RQ2 pdf as part of the KS - and it uses Futura font, just like the earlier printings of OD&D, as well as Holmes & the early AD&D books. That alone goes a long way towards giving it that 'early days' feel. In contrast, the RQ2 pdf that I have uses a different font with serifs. |
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Mar 16, 2016 17:10:11 GMT -6
Plus, Glor ontha!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2016 19:44:00 GMT -6
What I like most about my copy of RQ1 is that when I read it I get a similar feel to ODE&D, FFC, early T&T and the like. Modern-day rulebooks are so textbook-like and sterile, early rulebooks are more conversational and alive. Admittedly, early rulebooks tend to have more contradictions, errata, misinterpretations, and so on, but I like reading them better. Great point. I just took a look at the preview of the RQ1 pdf - trying to decide whether to get it since I got the RQ2 pdf as part of the KS - and it uses Futura font, just like the earlier printings of OD&D, as well as Holmes & the early AD&D books. That alone goes a long way towards giving it that 'early days' feel. In contrast, the RQ2 pdf that I have uses a different font with serifs. We used Times and Helvetica for the RQ Classic book because those are the two fonts used in the original RuneQuest 2nd edition rulebook. |
|
