|
Post by Vile Traveller on Jun 17, 2020 7:09:09 GMT -6
Chaosium has expressed displeasure with my comparison document. nuChaosium go through life in displeasure at everything not excreted by them, and they go to great lengths to find such things in order to express their displeasure. In fact, Richard recently joined the Gringle's Pawnshop forums, at which point I promptly stopped visiting. Meints has been a member for ages, whining about stuff, but I find Richard even more offensive. The day Moon Design took over Chaosium was the worst day for Chaosium. At least if it had died at Charlie's hands it wouldn't have mutated into the parody of itself it is now.
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 17, 2020 8:22:01 GMT -6
In retrospect I think TDM and Mongoose did a better job. Maybe not as pretty and full of filler as NuChaosium, but RQ and CoC used to be games I wanted to sit down and play, and not some real life cult you have to "buy in to" , only to spend hours reading volume upon volume to start a game. Glorantha has become too unwieldy for practical use by any but Gloranthan Scholars (tm)*. And the amount of useless bloat in the new CoC is over the top. Purely pretty cash grab products.
Anyhoo, Thanks for the heads up.
*Granted- the NuChaosium did not invent this- it's been an issue since the late 1980s. However they have taken the ball, run with it and spiked in the endzone.
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jun 17, 2020 12:02:48 GMT -6
Well, yesterday I was feeling bummed, but today Scotty got back to me and they would like me to clean it up and they will host it as an official document. While that may make it a bit less dynamic for discussion, I think it does elevate the work and will give it more exposure.
In the meantime, considering this path, I am definitely going to make it private and give limited access since they have now actually made a reasonable request. If you want access, please PM me with an e-mail I can add to the Google Doc for access.
Thanks
Frank
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Jun 17, 2020 12:33:32 GMT -6
That's great turn of events, Frank!
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jun 17, 2020 12:36:23 GMT -6
That's great turn of events, Frank! Yes, their requests for cleanup will require a significant amount of work, but in the end, having an official document is great.
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Jun 13, 2021 1:02:59 GMT -6
Chaosium has expressed displeasure with my comparison document. At the moment it's still public, but if I don't resolve something with them, I will have to take it private. If you are interested in the document, please go to the document and request comment access and I will add you and then you will continue to be able to see it even if I have to take it private. Unfortunately it's impossible to do such a comparison document and follow their guidelines, so maybe they will find a way for it to still be available, but I'm guessing not... Frank First chance I've had to go through it properly, and it's quite an eye-opener! I like the change for encumbrance - from RQ1 "The authors of this game dislike elaborate Encumbrance rules with lots of bookkeeping." to RQ2's complex system which would have been simpler if they'd just used lbs and gotten rid of SIZ altogether ... an excellent case-in-point of where someone should have stepped back and said, "Hang on a minute, we came up with Things to make it easy, not to introduce a whole new system of measurement!"
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jul 7, 2021 15:49:45 GMT -6
That's great turn of events, Frank! Yes, their requests for cleanup will require a significant amount of work, but in the end, having an official document is great. I should add that I've given up on this. It's just too much work. I put a ton of effort in and instead of accepting it for what it was, a fan love letter to RQ, they wanted more... Why not work up a specific license for it and ask me to put a proper disclaimer at the top and maybe point out a handful of areas they'd prefer I used less of the original text? I have a love-hate relationship with NuChaosium. I love that they are keeping RuneQuest and Glorantha alive, and ARE putting out some great product, and HAVE allowed for some great fan products, on the other hand they easily get cranky about fan stuff (perhaps rightfully so - Copyright law really doesn't handle this stuff very well).
|
|
aramis
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 170
|
Post by aramis on Jul 7, 2021 17:13:31 GMT -6
I cross-posted this on the T&T page but thought that it actually might fit here better. Apologies if it's the wrong place. I've been doing some web brousing for Runequest and found some pages that discuss the history of the game. I thought I'd post some highlights. Edition HistoryChaosium: RuneQuest 1 (1978) Chaosium: RuneQuest 2 (1981) Avalon Hill: RuneQuest 3 (1984) Mongoose Publishing: RuneQuest (Actually RQ4; 2006) Mongoose Publishing: RuneQuest II (Actually RQ5; 2009) You're missing the Games Workshop release of RQ 3; it is the same rules as the AH RQ3, but in a different format.
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jul 7, 2021 19:48:07 GMT -6
I cross-posted this on the T&T page but thought that it actually might fit here better. Apologies if it's the wrong place. I've been doing some web brousing for Runequest and found some pages that discuss the history of the game. I thought I'd post some highlights. Edition HistoryChaosium: RuneQuest 1 (1978) Chaosium: RuneQuest 2 (1981) Avalon Hill: RuneQuest 3 (1984) Mongoose Publishing: RuneQuest (Actually RQ4; 2006) Mongoose Publishing: RuneQuest II (Actually RQ5; 2009) You're missing the Games Workshop release of RQ 3; it is the same rules as the AH RQ3, but in a different format. But that isn't a different edition. If we're going to count that, then we need the GW printing of RQ2, and RQ2 boxed vs unboxed... And of course now there's RuneQuest Glorantha. Plus Mythras, Open Quest and others... Oh, and isn't there a different beast that was in development called RQ4 that was NOT Mongoose RQ...
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jul 7, 2021 19:50:17 GMT -6
Yes, their requests for cleanup will require a significant amount of work, but in the end, having an official document is great. I should add that I've given up on this. It's just too much work. I put a ton of effort in and instead of accepting it for what it was, a fan love letter to RQ, they wanted more... Why not work up a specific license for it and ask me to put a proper disclaimer at the top and maybe point out a handful of areas they'd prefer I used less of the original text? I have a love-hate relationship with NuChaosium. I love that they are keeping RuneQuest and Glorantha alive, and ARE putting out some great product, and HAVE allowed for some great fan products, on the other hand they easily get cranky about fan stuff (perhaps rightfully so - Copyright law really doesn't handle this stuff very well). I thank you for your efforts Frank. I wish you were able to work this out. You know my opinion of the NuChaosium, and I'll spare the venom.
|
|
|
Post by stevemitchell on Jul 7, 2021 20:09:32 GMT -6
You're missing the Games Workshop release of RQ 3; it is the same rules as the AH RQ3, but in a different format. But that isn't a different edition. If we're going to count that, then we need the GW printing of RQ2, and RQ2 boxed vs unboxed... And of course now there's RuneQuest Glorantha. Plus Mythras, Open Quest and others... Oh, and isn't there a different beast that was in development called RQ4 that was NOT Mongoose RQ... You are probably thinking of Runequest: Slayers.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jul 8, 2021 11:18:39 GMT -6
There exists a PDF of the unpublished 1993 “AHG9000 - RuneQuest: Adventures in Glorantha”, which would indeed have been the 4th Edition of RuneQuest if it was published at the time. It is by Oliver Jovanovic, Michael McGloin, and Carl Fink.
There also exists a PDF entitled RuneQuest: Slayers, which is by Christopher Lawrence & J.C. Connors. This would appear to be a completely different effort; it certainly seems to have no shared DNA. It was apparently slated to be published in 1998. It would also have been the 4th Edition of RuneQuest if it had been.
The present (2020?) “RuneQuest: Roleplaying in Glorantha,” was ALSO called referred to by Chaosium as RQ4, under the logic that all these other efforts in-between were not in-house Chaosium editions of RuneQuest.
BTW, if we are going to be thorough I guess we could also list Sandy Petersen’s Sorcery rules and Steve Perrin’s SPQR rules.
|
|
aramis
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 170
|
Post by aramis on Jul 8, 2021 22:21:48 GMT -6
You're missing the Games Workshop release of RQ 3; it is the same rules as the AH RQ3, but in a different format. But that isn't a different edition. If we're going to count that, then we need the GW printing of RQ2, and RQ2 boxed vs unboxed... And of course now there's RuneQuest Glorantha. Plus Mythras, Open Quest and others... Oh, and isn't there a different beast that was in development called RQ4 that was NOT Mongoose RQ... It is different if you didn't get the Advanced book... the split into the player/GM/combnned box is not the same split as Basic and Advanced books from GM. It should be mentioned. I don't know if 2E was the same or not with GW versions, but I do know that the organizational difference and the difference in standalone box content does affect it, and the GW license is a significant factor in the history of RQ... in no small part because Mongoose's founder experienced the GW version before the business was started. And his warped affection for the basic GW version lead to his Trademark grab and subsequent blackmailing a license for Glorantha out of Greg Stafford. (There was invective in his posts at that point. He'd been patirently waiting and filed as soon as he could... mongoose walked theirs in before Greg.)
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jul 9, 2021 7:05:42 GMT -6
Avalon Hill also had a small boxed set for RQ3 late in it's life that was a subset of the full game (like the way GW split it). I had a copy in my collecting days. Blue box, called the "Standard" set to differentiate it from the Deluxe softcover (which was the same contents as the original full boxed set for RQ3- I still own a copy the deluxe softcover). As I recall, it had a few mechanical changes to make it work as a full game after being hacked down, but I do not remember details. Noble Knight has a copy of the Standard box in stock right now. RQ3 Standard Boxed Set
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jul 9, 2021 9:13:45 GMT -6
But that isn't a different edition. If we're going to count that, then we need the GW printing of RQ2, and RQ2 boxed vs unboxed... And of course now there's RuneQuest Glorantha. Plus Mythras, Open Quest and others... Oh, and isn't there a different beast that was in development called RQ4 that was NOT Mongoose RQ... It is different if you didn't get the Advanced book... the split into the player/GM/combnned box is not the same split as Basic and Advanced books from GM. It should be mentioned. I don't know if 2E was the same or not with GW versions, but I do know that the organizational difference and the difference in standalone box content does affect it, and the GW license is a significant factor in the history of RQ... in no small part because Mongoose's founder experienced the GW version before the business was started. And his warped affection for the basic GW version lead to his Trademark grab and subsequent blackmailing a license for Glorantha out of Greg Stafford. (There was invective in his posts at that point. He'd been patirently waiting and filed as soon as he could... mongoose walked theirs in before Greg.) I still really wouldn't consider that a separate edition. Is that really any different than many modern rule sets offering quick starts or starter sets? Under your logic, soon there will be three editions of RQG (quick start, core book, starter set). Identifying different editions is definitely always a tricky thing. It IS worth noting the variants of each edition, so we might properly have: RQ1 RQ2 (single book, boxed set, GW printing) RQ3 (basic, deluxe, GW printing) MRQ1 MRQ2 RQG And then notes about RQ Slayers, Mythras, Legends, Open Quest, etc. Of course it's also interesting to consider that the differences between RQ1 and RQ2 aren't really any more drastic than the differences between 1977 Traveller and 1981 Traveller (The Traveller Book and Starter Traveller are much less different from 1981 than 1981 is different from 1977) but I never knew there was even a difference until 2008 or so. My quest for understanding differences has resulted in section by section comparisons of RQ1/2 and Traveller 1977/1981/TTB/ST to identify just how much difference there is. Picking apart the versions of RQ3 would surely show some differences beyond just text that isn't present in the reduced rule sets, and might show minor corrections between the AH and GW versions. Someone else will have to do that comparison though since I don't have access to all the different versions...
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Jul 10, 2021 3:00:12 GMT -6
[...] Mongoose's [...] Trademark grab and subsequent blackmailing a license for Glorantha out of Greg Stafford. That's interesting, I've never heard that. Didn't Mongoose licence the name "RuneQuest" from Issaries, as well as 2nd age Glorantha? Is there anywhere in the intertubes that still has a record of this? I always thought at the time there was a tiff between Issaries/Moon Design who had the RQ and Glorantha IP, and Chaosium who retained copyright of the RQ3 text stripped of the Gloranthan content (their Basic Roleplaying monograms), and that licencing to Mongoose was a bit of a poke in the eye of Chaosium by Stafford. EDIT: When Mongoose's RQ licence ended I spoke to Stafford about licencing the brand, so by that point at least he owned the name. I wisely dropped the idea prior to it being taken up by The Design Mechanism who later had it pulled by nuChaosium in less-than fragrant circumstances.
|
|
aramis
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 170
|
Post by aramis on Jul 12, 2021 3:23:32 GMT -6
Greg posted about being beaten to the trademark, IIRC, on the Pendragon forums at the time. Meanwhile, Matthew was bragging about it... his blackmail was, paraphrased, "You want the TM, we want access to Glorantha."
Matthew had mentioned having played RQ3 on his blog...
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Jul 12, 2021 6:01:23 GMT -6
Greg posted about being beaten to the trademark, IIRC, on the Pendragon forums at the time. Meanwhile, Matthew was bragging about it... his blackmail was, paraphrased, "You want the TM, we want access to Glorantha." I see, that would make sense. I'd call it negotiation, not blackmail, though. It would be interesting to know what happened subsequently, with RuneQuest reverting to Issaries and Mongoose having a limited 2nd Age Glorantha licence for only a few years. Looks like Stafford is the one who got what he wanted in the end, for a little while at least.
|
|