[Runequest] Re : Runequest II

Alban de ROSTOLAN aluban at yahoo.fr
Thu Nov 4 20:46:22 EST 2010

I think the real reason why Mongoose called their second version of the game 
"RuneQuest II" is because they published the first one under an OGL licence, 
which they now want to get rid of.

After all, a lot of roleplaying games exist with second, third, fifth, etc. 
editions and MRQII is the only one I know in which the edition has been included 
in the name. Except perhaps "*Advanced* Dungeons & Dragons".

In short, I see a difference between calling a game "RuneQuest II" and 
"RuneQuest, 2nd edition".

De : Simon Phipp <soltakss at yahoo.com>
À : runequest at rpgreview.net
Envoyé le : Mer 3 novembre 2010, 21h 15min 05s
Objet : Re: [Runequest] Runequest II

Harry Woolley:
> can any body explain to me why there is a runequest 11 as ther is 3 and 4? do 
>the new additions? 
> not inprove on the ones before,should it not be called 5 as it is a inproved 

RQ1 and RQ2 were brought out by Chaosium in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

RQ3 was brought out by Avalon Hill, but written by Chaosium, in 1985.

There was a proposed RQ4 in the 1990s that was never published.

Mongoose brought out a new version of RuneQuest (MRQ1) in 2005 (?) as Issaries 
Inc had the rights to RuneQuest (I believe). That version was full of holes and 
wasn't very good from a rules point of view.

Mongoose brought out a new version of RuneQuest (MRQ2), which they called 
RuneQuest II (as the earlier versions clearly meant nothing to them). This was a 
lot better, ruleswise, and is a vast improvement on MRQ1.

In my opinion, I would rank the versions as follows (best version at the top):

However, other people will definitely disagree ...

See Ya


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20101104/20c99d73/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Runequest mailing list