So on the one hand it looks like a bunch of my old RuneQuest stuff is semi-seriously collectible. But on the other hand, all the eBay listings at silly prices are in the States and trying to actually sell stuff is a complete pain in the backside


RQII or RQ3? I see you have the RQIII stuff, but is that the collectible bit? I still prefer RQII, although I know that 3 has its fans.

@AspiringLuddite I’ve not really looked, but the big RQ2 reprint volumes from Moon Design also seem to go for a premium?
As for RQII vs RQ3, I find the systems close enough not to have a strong opinion either way. Systems are the most important part of a game for me, except to the extent they underpin the worldbuilding



IIRC-RQ3 went to improvement by d6 increments rather than 5%,and changed the character generation mechanism-neither of which I liked.It did some cool stuff with shamanism,though.

As for systems being important-I'm all about systems and mechanics. I almost never use commercial settings or adventures-although there are some exceptions where the setting is deeply tied to the system. (eg Warhammer).

It's probably why I've never been a big fan of 'tie-in' games like Star Wars, etc.

@AspiringLuddite Oh, yes the shamanism stuff is noticeably better. As for approaches, it sounds like I’m pretty much the opposite? Very story-centric, system agnostic, lean heavily on published material because otherwise adhd leaves me paralysed with indecision


I find that some systems lend themselves to certain kinds of stories/adventures,and matching systems to play style is key to my enjoyment.I like systems where there is something to do in the 'down-time'-Ars Magica is a prime example,but also Pendragon,Golden Heroes,and others.Systems which encourage having a character not essentially defined by combat effectiveness (looking at you, D&D;-)

The systems I go back to are the ones that make it easy to tell the stories I want to tell.


I do like roll-your-own settings and adventures, though. (For some values of 'settings.')

@AspiringLuddite That’s close to what I mean by “except to the extent they underpin the worldbuilding”, I think. But I prefer generic systems to a mass of clever mechanics (*cough*Robin Laws*cough*)


Heh - I do love me some clever mechanics, though;-)

After a quick search, I don't think I know any of RL's systems (Although I've heard of Feng Shui.)

@AspiringLuddite Trail of Cthulhu/Gumshoe is his, I think. Rune, the Dying Earth RPG, and the first iteration of the Hero Quest/Hero Wars system for Glorantha, too

@AspiringLuddite Dying Earth is actually okay, I think, though the humour is inevitably less dry and ironic than actual Jack Vance

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Medievalists and Medieval-adjacent. Sort-of.