[Runequest] Runequest Digest, Vol 36, Issue 6

Simon Phipp soltakss at yahoo.com
Sun Jun 12 04:06:13 EST 2011


Vile:

> I believe the reason Greg has the rights to the name rather than Chaosium is
> because he was quicker on the draw when it became available again - if I
> remember correctly, it was sitting idle for a little while and anyone could
> have picked up the TM. I wonder why Greg doesn't use the name for HeroQuest?

Probably because HeroQuest had been touted as the natural follow-on from RuneQuest for 30 years or so.

I always galled me that Games Workshop had trademarked HeroQuest when it was obvious that Chaosium were going to try and bring out a game. It didn't happen for a long while because people tried to do it with RuneQuest and it didn't work.

> I suppose it wouldn't add much value, while leasing out the TM could bring
> in a bit of cash for no real effort. 

Granting licences to companies is a good way of bringing in the cash, especially if the licences don't involve any work from Issaries.

By the way, I'm with Phil Hibbs in the "Questing for Runes" argument. RuneQuest has never really been about Questing for Runes. Sure, powerful people become Rune Lords/Priests and get the Mastery/Magic Rune, in theory, but HeroQuests have been about something very different for such a long time that the Questing for Runes is pretty redundant. Having said that, we use Runes to grant powers and my players are questing for different runes at the moment.

See Ya

Simon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20110611/596583f3/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Runequest mailing list