[Runequest] Reissues was Re: Runequest Digest, Vol 30, Issue 7

[Lev Lafayette]

On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 08:55 +0000, Bruce Mason wrote:
> 
> 

> I reckon it takes a certain amount of wilful misunderstanding to
> somehow think that Mongoose was re-releasing Chaosium's second edition
> of RQ especially as the Chaosium edition was not actually called RQ2
> until well after the advent of the Avalon Hill version.

Well, of course it wasn't called RQ2 until after RQ3. RQ1 was pretty
much a very good first draft for RQ2. RQ3 was a really a thorough new
edition.

>  If you actually look at what was published:

Ta, I did put that list up earlier in the thread...

I do actually own two copies of RQ1, about six of RQ 2, about twenty (!)
of RQIII, *cough* a PDF *cough of AiG, 3 copies of MRQ and a copy of
MRQII.

(And RQ Slayers)

> Mongoose published an edition called RuneQuest on the cover.
> They then published a new edition called RuneQuest II.
> To date it is the only published edition of RuneQuest that is not
> simply called "RuneQuest"* Everything else is a lay usage (usually RQ2
> and RQ3). Naturally there are some people fighting culture wars but
> that's their choice (after all there are Dr Who fans who refuse to
> watch the new series because they are named Series 1-5 rather than
> Season 27+). Personally I would have called it RQV but that's because
> I think it looks cooler than RQII and I've been playing RQ since
> around 1981 and I have my books and boxes neatly lined up in
> chronological order on my shelf. 

Sure; and it's kinda weird not to play a game based on its name. But the
OP in this thread (Harry) came in confused. And that confusion is
problematic. On rpg.net, I think smascrns made the point quite explicit:

http://forum.rpg.net/showpost.php?p=11403615&postcount=97

I've read over that strongly worded post several times now over the past
couple of years, and I have to admit, I cannot fault *anything* he's
said there.

> As for the relationship, Mongoose's two editions are mostly derived
> from RQ2 rather than RQ3.

I would disagree with that, strongly. MRQ2 is much more heavily derived
from RQ3, and MRQ1 is more strongly derived from RQ2. Have a look at the
way that occupations are handled.

> In terms of a BRP uncle, it's something like a cousin who emigrated to
> Australia (assuming of course you're not Australian...)

That's not a very sound assumption to make.... ;)



Lev