Monday, December 27, 2010

Look What Arrived in the Mail

A late Christmas package appeared on my doorstep today:

I'm going to be very busy these next few weeks, I think -- not that I'm complaining.

14 comments:

  1. Looks like your going to be busy, in the fun way.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hmm...DQ is an "interesting" game. Reading it is one thing; gameplay is something else entirely...

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd be curious as to how it compares with Universe in terms of rules and complexity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This was the game my core group left D&D over. The added complexity was outweighed by the things that "fixed" the problems we felt were embedded too deeply in the D&D system. Things like the encumbering but damage lessing effect of armor and the character and experience systems seemed right on target. It's lack of in-depth support (read crazy loads of supplements and modules) forced us to be a whole bunch more creative. It was great.

    Until Fantasy HERO came along and we dumped Dragonquest. We stuck with that until we stopped playing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To be honest, despite the complexity DQ ran quite well. We houseruled it to make skills and abilities more standardized, as well as designing a few reference sheets, so you could easily generate a character without the rulebook. I thought it was better than D&D at the time I ran it, which was about 8 years after its heyday. I had a university student group in the early 90s, and I had purchased the game from some random seller desperate for cash at the same college). Paul Jaquays designed a couple of the better supplements for it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. DragonQuest... An great game indeed. We loved and played it a lot, in the early eighties. With many houserules too.

    But I must be honnest: it had many features I now dislike in modern RPG (even if we saw them as improvements", at the time). The result is a slow and complex game to run with a strong "wargame" feeling during the combat sequences. At least, DQ had many more to offer than combat (see below)...

    The "Book of Magic" is so wonderful I still regularly read it with great pleasure.

    There is definitely a special "flavor" with that game, even if it's now long dead, which makes me consider DragonQuest one of the best RPG ever made.

    ReplyDelete
  7. After having read DQ quite extensively, but not yet gotten around to playing it, wonder a bit about the claims that it's so complex.

    D&D is also quite complex, if you approach it from the outside. "Everyone" knows it, and thus wont see it as anything but the easy basic standard.

    Is DQ that complex in play? It don't read that complex. Like I said, I have not played it, so I might be talking out my behind, but I have played game which when read looked more complex.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ah Palace of Ontocle - one of my favorites (I converted it to Rolemaster). I've had at least three groups through it. One of the earlier ones released the Duke of Fire, Aim. He then turned the entire area around the Palace into a volcanic caldera. The later groups had to oust him. :)

    That module and The Enchanted Woods are, IMHO, the best of the DQ modules. Others (Camp of Alla-Akabar [sp], House of Kurin, Treasure of Socantri etc.) are good as well.

    ReplyDelete
  9. DragonQuest is still one of my favourite fantasy rpgs ever, and it's a game system that I ran for a little over 25+ years. I've never understood why some people consider the game to be complex rules-wise, but that's a whole 'nother debate.

    For me, the three scenarios published by the company - The Palace of Ontoncle, The Blade of Allectus, and The Enchanted Wood - brought me endless sessions of gaming enjoyment. Love that game system to death!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Wow. The first edition *boxed set* of DQ... one of the few differences between that and the "mostly white softcover book" version is that they hadn't yet thrown away the insanely fiddly Action Point system for running combats.

    (Yeah, I've still got my first edition boxed set rulebooks, and the Palace of Ontoncle, though not the box anymore...)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Yeah, it might be worth mentioning. I only have read the 2nd ed. My point is only valid for that edition.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Andreas, there isn't *that* much difference. I do remember a review of the first edition, by Mike Stackpole, in Sorcerer's Apprentice magazine, where Stackpole was flabbergasted at the Action Point system and couldn't believe anybody would really use it. And lo and behold, it disappeared completely in the 2nd edition.

    But on the whole the two editions are very, very similar. The changes do tend to be in the area of making things easier on the players and on the characters (making it less difficult to increase in power, that kind of thing).

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Others (Camp of Alla-Akabar [sp], House of Kurin, Treasure of Socantri etc.) are good as well."

    I played DQ back in the day, and I still think I have all my DQ paraphenalia packed away somewhere, but I don't remember these 3 as DQ modules. Where they examples in the rulebooks, found elsewhere?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.