Loose Canon

[bluegargantua]

Hey,

 The following comes from Ron's original review of Hero Wars which can be found at http://www.indie-rpgs.com/reviews/16/

My most major concern is whether the story will be told for us over time, as in Vampire and L5R, in which case Glorantha will be something we can witness but not create. The scenario book enhances this concern, as the player-characters may participate in a pre-arranged plot event, specifically the appearance of a dragon during the armed conflict in Sartar. I really, really hope that 1620 or so, or whenever it is that the dragon unearths itself, remains the last year in the canon, so that working out the various issues remains with the individual play groups rather than with some official line of fiction. The rules do give some weight to this hope, based on how Heroquesting permits even the mythic canon to be altered somewhat, such that conceivably a play group might end up with a unique modification of the mythology.

 So I've picked up the latest adventure book Gathering Thunder and I'm wondering if Ron's fears aren't coming true.  We're still a book off from the Dragonrise so it's hard to see whether or not they'll put the brakes on things, but there's this weight of canon building up here.  Yes, I know, the books talk about "Your Glorantha Will Vary", but they also talk about these pre-destined "Great Events" which happen regardless of what players do -- which I think is a very round-about Impossible Thing.

 To be fair, you could just ditch the adventure books and play without it.  Indeed, if you're not interested in playing Orlanthi, these adventure books are really pretty unimportant.  But while Glorantha is big, the focus of almost all the source material has been in/around Dragon Pass.  And there's some really nifty stuff in all the adventure books.  And these represent your best chance to see how a HeroQuest adventure might be set up.  So they're valuable.  But each book produces more "now this happens and it's important so it needs to happen".

 It seems very de-protagonizing.  Yeah, you get to rub shoulders with Kallyr, but when push comes to shove, she's the one who does all the cool stuff.  In the Sky Ship scenario, you pretty much get told to piss off when the really important stuff happens.  I think the worst part is that even if they stop at the Dragonrise, well...there's an Argrath who guns for the throne.  If PCs want to try for it (and there's no reason to think that they couldn't/wouldn't) they seem woefully unprepared to make a bid for it.  Their only qualification seems to be that they helped out on the side while god-level heroes did their thing.  Where is the opportunity for the PCs to leave their stamp?

 Very early on, in my D&D days, I played out a series of Forgotten Realms modules.  These were all about how the goddess Mystra incorporated into the pantheon.  It was...fun I seem to recall, but the players were completely pushed to the side.  The cosomology was changing and that happened pretty much no matter what.  So why are the PCs there?  For D&D, gold and XP were completely worthwhile, but I think that HeroQuest will require a bit more.

later
Tom

[Thor Olavsrud]

Hmmm...I'd be more concerned if the "plot" were advancing across all the supplements. For the moment, I don't see that happening. If they just advance the plot through the Sartar Rising campaign books (which should end with the fourth book), I don't really see it as a problem. They're just advancing a sample campaign.

Also, I find stuff like the "You Can Be Argrath" sidebar in Orlanth Is Dead to be fairly reassuring. Even in the context of the metaplot, they are being sure to leave openings to allow your players to be absolutely central to the story.

And let's face it: all this stuff we're seeing in the Sartar Rising campaign is following Gloranthan history that is already more or less laid down in King of Sartar (at least so I understand, I'm a newcomer to Glorantha and don't own it; I'm hoping for a reprint soon).

Also, considering the nature of Glorantha and the way Heroquests can change the world, it's pretty much impossible for history to be stagnant in the world. How can a metaplot stand up to that?

[Invain]

I find myself of two minds on this issue. On one hand, I really like the whole Hero Wars plotline as it appears in King of Sartar, etc. On the other hand, this *is* a game we are talking about. So...

One litmus test I use is the amount of description or (worse) reading to the players that happens. The Ship Raising adventure (which is just one of many adventures in Gathering Thunder) doesn't fair all that well here. I think the authors succumbed to the temptation to tell the cool shipraising story rather than write a good PC focused adventure. I believe that if the players are not actually the protagonists of the Ship Raising, then the adventure should have focused on where they *are* centrally important. The Ship Raising itself should then happen off camera as "Thanks to your valiant and completely necessary efforts the Ship Raising succeeded."

I was also left foggy on what exactly was going on in the Ship Raising adventure, but that is another issue. :)

What I would really like to see, instead of "it happens this way" adventures, would be supplements with more information on the basic HW plotlines themselves. There are supposedly gobs of secret plots and so forth going on in Glorantha that will all trip over each other and cause the end of the world as we know it. I can tell my own stories if I know the basics of what these plots and major groups/NPCs are. Issaries' position of "these will be described in later supplements" is not all that helpful - especially if, as in Ship Raising, the future supplements don't really tell you anything significant about the other participating groups. A "Plots of the Early Hero Wars" book would be much more generally useful.

It appears that the new World of Glorantha book (http://www.glorantha.com/products/1105.html) might have some of this, and I am very interested to see what they do with it.

~Kevin McD

[pete_darby]

[rumour]Apparently, a more "active" version of the adventure was proposed, but shot down by Greg himself in preference for Minaryth infodumping and pc tourism.[/rumour]

Now, I'll be ripping the story out of gregs hands and running into the hills laughing like a maniac with it, but the drift towards assuming PC's are observers of great events rather than instigators to be [darth] disturbing[/darth]

Part of me is a bit upset by the revealed mindset of greg drifting towards the attitude of "your players are observers of my story", but another part of me is saying "meh, after the terrible things you did to the arc plots of Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Lucas knows what else in other games, you worry about futzing with Glorantha's arc plot?"

But it always seemed that Glorantha was developed with "clearly demarked lines of ambiguity" to slot PC's into, and this seems to be going away a bit now...

Or I'm an overreacting fanboy. Nah, couldn't be.

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

Actually, I'm optimistic about this issue, based on the following ideas.

Pre-set events don't mean pre-set character decisions. I've written pretty extensively in various places since that review that changing setting does not necessarily mean the same as metaplot (in the common sense of pre-determined story).

The key concept is that the canonical "Glorantha history" events are openly available and known to everyone at the table. That's the big difference. In a White Wolf style metaplot, the point is to wow the characters and the players with the pre-planned revelations, via play itself. In a Gloranthan changing-setting, the point is for everyone to milk the commonly-known event (before, during, after) for as much Premise-meat as possible throughout play.

My experiences through play confirmed this point again and again. When we took the characters to Boldhome, for instance, everyone was fascinated by the various canonical textual details of Temertain's assassination, although our story took place two years prior. Our fascination led us to spend quite a bit of time developing Temertain and various other characters, both canonical and original, in a variety of conflicts for the player-characters.

Best,
Ron

[bluegargantua]

Pre-set events don't mean pre-set character decisions. I've written pretty extensively in various places since that review that changing setting does not necessarily mean the same as metaplot (in the common sense of pre-determined story).

Pre-set events do limit character effectiveness however.  If you're a Lunar who comes up with a fool-proof plan to kill off Kallyr -- all your effort will go to naught because her story is pre-plotted and you're just some schmuck who ran up against her plot-protection field.  True, a good GM will pay attention to what the players want and if they come up with a fool-proof way to bump off a major Hero Wars figure and the dice go their way, then she's dead and the GM starts to improvise.  But that's not the way the adventures come across and it can be really hard to predict future alterations based on what we currently know (more on that in a moment).

The other problem, is the fact that the PCs are supposed to be Heroes.  If they're not Harrek the Berserker today, just give them time -- they'll work their way up to it.  What I want to see are opportunities and examples for them to step in and do big things, because that's what the players will expect to see.  Maybe not right away, but eventually, they want to stalk the God World and start making some changes.

Let's talk about Godlike for a moment.  Godlike is a great example of changing-setting.  It's WWII and you're a grunt with minor superpowers.  Everyone knows how WWII plays out.  The Axis looks unbeatable and then the Allies get their act together and grind them down to a pulp.  In Godlike, despite the addition of superpowered soldiers, the war plays out almost identically to real life because despite the super powers, they cancel each other out for the most part.

At the baseline level of Godlike, you're special because of your superpowers and you have adventures that most other soldiers will never have, but you can't really make a significant difference in WWII.  The base book plots it all out for you.  But the game isn't about super-heroes who single-handedly wipe out panzer brigades and capture Hitler.  The game is about being a simple soldier thrust into hell.  It's about having miraculous powers that are ultimately futile to stopping the insanity or even saving your friends.  It's all about War is Hell.  So from its focus, it doesn't matter that you can't turn the course of history because that's not where the game is at.

But while the game has a focus, it also recognizes that maybe you want to play 200-300 point characters with powers up the wahzoo who could single-handedly change history.  It does make a short foray into that, but all it basically says is "this isn't how we, the designers, have focused the game.  If you want to do that, that's cool by us, but we can't support you as easily because who knows how history will run if you play Godlike without the -like".  A totally fair stance on their part and at least they've got that surprisingly detailed timeline to work off of when your PCs storm Tokyo.

But HeroQuest, time and again, puts its focus squarely on the PCs being Heroes who will Determine The Shape Of The New World.  If that's your focus, then you need to have adventures that support that.  And maybe not adventures per se, but broad outlines of things that the PCs could do.  I realize that helping out major NPCs in their quests gives the PCs some name recognition and resources to call on when they do their stuff.  But nothing in the adventure books so far have really opened up the throttle to give the PCs a chance to leave their mark.  

The key concept is that the canonical "Glorantha history" events are openly available and known to everyone at the table. That's the big difference. In a White Wolf style metaplot, the point is to wow the characters and the players with the pre-planned revelations, via play itself. In a Gloranthan changing-setting, the point is for everyone to milk the commonly-known event (before, during, after) for as much Premise-meat as possible throughout play.

Small side note:  "Milking an event for Premise-meat" is my new disturbing phrase of the day.

It is commonly asserted that you need to be some sort of Glornathian expert to play HeroQuest.  I have a friend who bristles at the idea of playing HQ because of all the arcane game history you need to know.  He's currently running a Cold War spy game.  I know next to nothing about about intelligence agencies during the 70's, he's got a bookshelf of material.  Clearly, his argument is hollow.  Any setting, real or imagined, can be incredibly detailed and require a fair amount of reading to get into.

However, my contention is that the events of Glorantha are not as openly available and known to everyone as they could be (or should be).  Yes, it's a fantasy world so it's not like there's going to be thousands of published volumes about the subjects.  It's not going to get it's own section at Barnes and Noble.  But within the published material commercially available, there just isn't enough.  The Sky Ship adventure is a perfect example of this.  There was a blue star?  And it disappeared?  And now it's back?  And it's Axials's ship?  But Heortlings are helping? What?  Details within the adventure are terribly skimpy.

Ah, but there's the company website...let's see...Glorantha...History...Heortlings...Lunars....nothing.

Further, aside from a timeline in Orlanth is Dead, there's very little explanation of what's gong to happen in the future.  A dragon is going to show up and eat everyone.  Um...OK...so how does this sky trip tie into that?  Even if you go with Kallyr you won't know.  Without any sort of real understanding of how current canonical events came about and what happens afterward, I'd say we're not too far off from metaplot.

Again, it's a question of focus.  If PCs are going to be god-dueling Heroes then detailing what Jar-Eel has for breakfast every day is pointless.  Having tons of historical detail is unimportant because the PCs will run things right off the track.  But then don't keep shoving them into adventures where they don't get to do anything.

Now maybe they're trying to have it both ways.  You have a richly detailed history and then (say after the dragon shows up) canonical history "stops" and the PCs can go to town.  They've got this deep backstory to pull stuff out of and move forward.  They've participated in some of the key events so they know the movers and shakers and they're invested in the setting.  But the historical information available, from just the basic, for sale, gaming material is terribly scarce and the amount of participation within these great events seems terribly, terribly limited.

Now, lest you think I have nothing good to say, Orlanth is Dead, actually had a pretty good sidebar explaining what was happening with the winds stopping and what was happening all over Glorantha.  That was a vital sidebar and there needs to be a lot more stuff like that for the canonical stuff.  I think what's also needed is an adventure or two that rises above clan feuds and minor raiding where the PCs dig in and take care of matters.  (Well, that and a block of adventures for Lunars or Praxians or someone besides Heortlings.  Ideally a Lunar adventure that shows the "other side" of what the Heortlings are doing).

later
Tom

[Jere]

It is commonly asserted that you need to be some sort of Glornathian expert to play HeroQuest.  I have a friend who bristles at the idea of playing HQ because of all the arcane game history you need to know.  He's currently running a Cold War spy game.  I know next to nothing about about intelligence agencies during the 70's, he's got a bookshelf of material.  Clearly, his argument is hollow.  Any setting, real or imagined, can be incredibly detailed and require a fair amount of reading to get into.

The problem isn't level of detail, its availability of detail. The problems of game settings like Glorantha, Tekumel or even the Forgotten realms is that a large chunk of assumptions are unknowable to any but a small group of people (heck they might even be making them up as they go) and these assumptions drive a fair amount of the events in the world. Unlike historically absed games where the past is pretty much available for anyone with the time and energy to look (thanks to the wodners of libraries) that of these fictional worlds is not (though not necessarily the case with all fictonal worlds). And this leads to levels of esoterica that I, and many others choose not to explore. I do not want to have to refer to MAR Barker's campaign notes written up in some Tekumel covention zine, or an article printed in a British Glorantha fanzine from 10 years ago in order to understand crucial things bout a world I choose to game in. Unfortunately Glorantha currently still has a lot of the detritus gathered from so many eyars of being a cult game. And the only way t escape tht is to blow open the doors and let all the secrets out.

Secrets in game supplements that are dolled out in dribs and drabs is one of the primaryily accepted definitions of metaoplots. Another one is a need to have a variety of products most of which are not available to a casual newcomer. Glorantha (like the WoD did) has both.

Jere

[Bankuei]

Hi folks,

I agree with Ron that when you have predestined events on the table, it can open up plenty of room for creating great stories.  I also agree with Jere that the in this particular case, not all the information is really available.  The HQ book gives a very brief rundown of events before the Hero Wars, but not much about what happens later("Um, there's going to be Hero Wars, and it starts here.")  

Chris

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

Tom, I'm disagreeing with you on a couple of points.

1. There's literally no meaning to having a constraint and not having a constraint. Whatever details of Kallyr's story are set - OK, that's a constraint, and the point is to make it a creative springboard for a Premise. Not "will Kallyr live or die, oh no!" but rather, "what does my character do (or contribute to!) when Kallyr kicks the bucket in the fashion that we know she will?"

Who knows, maybe your Lunar's plan works!! But do you see that by using the word "foolproof," you effectively reject the constraint. That can't happen - a constraint is a constraint. Mess with that and it's like someone deciding to move the goalposts a yard further apart.

2. No one has to know all of Gloranthan lore in order to play it, mainly because there's no prize for running Glorantha the most faithfully to canon. For instance, we used a lot of material in The Haunted Ruins - but placed it all in Far Point.

Oh no! Does that mean that groups across the land suddenly looked at their maps in surprise as the Haunted Ruins unaccountably disappeared from their original position, to relocate in Far Point? Nope. Screw it. Doesn't matter.

Nor does a much more significant change matter, which was based on mis-understanding the canon rather than on a mere logistic shift. I didn't grasp the Windstop at all; when we were playing, the Sartar Rising stuff wasn't even barely in pre-production. So our game went right through that set of events with about 20% conformity.

Disaster? Nope. That's our Glorantha. We used what we knew, and it was fine.

And finally, what's the big deal about knowing it "all" at the start? My players and I learned a ton of things on the fly - "Hey, we're in Boldhome. Pass me that book." Tod became a troll junkie only after some trolls came into play, and he buried himself in texts just because he liked it. His readings led to tons of new cool stuff for our game. We essentially just built and sophisticated our knowledge of the setting as we went.

Granted, I had a running start on them, enough to get the game going, but the point was that we casually and painlessly soaked stuff up by becoming interested during play.

Best,
Ron

[Donald]

The problem isn't level of detail, its availability of detail. The problems of game settings like Glorantha, Tekumel or even the Forgotten realms is that a large chunk of assumptions are unknowable to any but a small group of people (heck they might even be making them up as they go) and these assumptions drive a fair amount of the events in the world.

That's not so far from the truth, the people writing stuff for Glorantha make the background fit the story they want to tell. That goes though a filter (Greg) to make sure it's consistant with *his* Glorantha and then an editorial filter to fit a publication. However this isn't an exclusive group of insiders, anyone can join in by getting known on the email lists and contributing interesting ideas. How else is stuff going to be published? if we wait for Greg to write everything it'll never happen.

The only published story arc is 'King of Sartar' and generally anything published is going to fit within that or there's a way of explaining the discrepancy.

Unlike historically absed games where the past is pretty much available for anyone with the time and energy to look (thanks to the wodners of libraries) that of these fictional worlds is not (though not necessarily the case with all fictonal worlds).

I don't agree that historically based games don't have a similar problem. There it is a matter of which version of history the game designer is working to and is it the same as yours?

And this leads to levels of esoterica that I, and many others choose not to explore. I do not want to have to refer to MAR Barker's campaign notes written up in some Tekumel covention zine, or an article printed in a British Glorantha fanzine from 10 years ago in order to understand crucial things bout a world I choose to game in. Unfortunately Glorantha currently still has a lot of the detritus gathered from so many eyars of being a cult game. And the only way t escape tht is to blow open the doors and let all the secrets out.

What secrets are those? I wouldn't place much weight on a 10 year old fan publication as representing official Glorantha. Even official publications from that time are suspect in the context of HeroQuest. If I liked the idea I could well adopt it for my Glorantha but there's a lot of other ideas that applies to.

[jrichard]

>Unlike historically absed games where the past is pretty much available
>for anyone with the time and energy to look (thanks to the wodners of
>libraries) that of these fictional worlds is not (though not necessarily the
>case with all fictonal worlds).

For what it is worth, I completely disagree.  I've run (or help) strongly historical games set during the Persian Wars, the First Crusade, Elizabethan England, and the Thirty Years War.  Frankly, there is actually far more easily useful material to set a roleplaying game in Glorantha than in any of those historical periods.  Moreoever, it is easier to get players into the mindset of a Gloranthan than it is to really get into the mindset of a 11th century de Hauteville or a 5th century BC Athenian.

Jeff

[Invain]

Canon.  <shudder>

If there is a more fun-sucking word in the gamer's dictionary I don't know what it is. I am not sure why so many people get bent out of shape over it. Canon should only matter to people writing for publication or who are playing the trivia game on the mailing lists. I really don't think it has anything to do with playing an RPG at all.

I suppose this is the paradox of Gloranthan publishing. Gloranthan supplements serve at least two functions: 1) To help narrators run more interesting games. 2) Cool reading material to enjoy and maybe discuss with friends. These two functions are not always compatible. The best Gloranthan supplements strike a happy balance between the two extremes, but I don't guess it is an easy thing to do.

I do like published adventures, and recognize that they need to make certain assumptions to work, but I see them more as expamples and sources of inspriation than anything else. My feeling is that narrators should be given the overall plotline (for inspiration), and enough background material to adapt the story when things get weird. The more flexible they are the happier I will be.

~Kevin McDonald

[bluegargantua]

Hey,

1. There's literally no meaning to having a constraint and not having a constraint. Whatever details of Kallyr's story are set - OK, that's a constraint, and the point is to make it a creative springboard for a Premise. Not "will Kallyr live or die, oh no!" but rather, "what does my character do (or contribute to!) when Kallyr kicks the bucket in the fashion that we know she will?"

Who knows, maybe your Lunar's plan works!! But do you see that by using the word "foolproof," you effectively reject the constraint. That can't happen - a constraint is a constraint. Mess with that and it's like someone deciding to move the goalposts a yard further apart.

 I don't like constraints much.  :)

 I see that by "foolproof" I'm rejecting the constraint.  And if I had players who said "I'm gonna kill/save Kallyr" then I'd remove that constraint because they've got a different story in mind and collectively it'll probably be a better deal.

 I can also see a situation in which I, as a GM, say "look, Kallyr is gonna do this stuff and then she dies along here and that's set" and then turn players loose to bounce off of it.  Just like I might say "look, all the PCs have to be Heortlings".  I tend to prefer to place my constraints on start conditions rather than in-play events.

 What's annoying me is that I feel like the PCs should be doing the stuff Kallyr is doing.  The game pitches mythic fantasy and that's what I'd like to see in the adventure books.  Tagging along with Kallyr (for a bit) just doesn't seem to cut the mustard.  
 

2. No one has to know all of Gloranthan lore in order to play it, mainly because there's no prize for running Glorantha the most faithfully to canon.

 I've never felt terribly intimidated about Gloranthian lore.  Nor have I felt any need to run a game that adhered faithfully to every publically-available piece of information.  

 But if you're going to have a constraint (Kallyr's life and death) and if you run the PCs up against it (Iceland or the Sky Ship or whatever) then I feel fully entitled to some background information about the constraint.  If nothing else, I want to have an explanation for when the players ask "what the heck was that all about?".  I suppose if the characters have no idea what just happened that's one thing, but for the players to milk the event, they need a better clue about what's going on and I don't feel I got one from the adventure.

 By way of example:  Final Days at Skullpoint has all the information I need to understand what happened and what's likely (though not guaranteed) to happen in the future.  If that adventure were structured like the Sky Ship scenario it would go something like this:

 The PCs get roped into helping Kallyr.
 They all go to this place called Skullpoint.
 People sure are edgy.
 They also like to challenge people.
 Kallyr talks in private with the leaders.
 There's a fight.
 Kallyr goes to this ruin.
 Monster!
 Kallyr fends it off (but you help a bit).
 Kallyr yells at this other guy.
 Skullpoint is saved.

 What happened?  Oh something about a bad divorce.

 There's just not enough information available and worse, the players are starting to wonder why they wasted a session doing all this.  

 Jere:  Thanks for highlighting the point that historical material is more widely available.  That was something I meant to elaborate a bit but didn't get to.  Obviously, for a fantasy setting, availability will always pale in comparison.  So games based on historical/modern-day settings will always have an advantage in this arena.  Which is what makes the paucity of relevant background information in the adventure books really irritating.

 Anyway, I should also point out that most of my criticism is reserved for the "grand event" scenarios.  I've found most of the other adventures to be worthwhile (if a bit less-than-epic in many cases).  

later
Tom

[Mike Holmes]

We've been over these metaplot issues a lot before, here at The Forge. I've been staying out, because I really wanted to see these ideas develop again independently. But now that they have, compare them to this sampling:

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=9630
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=7358
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=7333
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=1974
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=886

One idea comes up again and again. Lots of people say that history works as metaplot. Well, the difference between history and problematic metaplots is player acceptance of what can and cannot be changed. That is, if history is known to the players, or they understand that history is going to march on as it did, historically, then they're more likely to accept that they, as Ron puts it, are playing "underneath" the metaplot. In a fantasy world, this is less acceptable to some players, because one of the advantages of a fantasy world is that it's history might not yet be set. Meaning that the players could change it, if they were only allowed.

Ron calls history that's understood to be non-changing just a part of the setting. Metaplot, then being those events which the players are to be exposed to as the plot of the game. But without agreeing or disagreeing with these definitions, the point is pretty clear. Most (not all) players are in a game to be able to have an affect on the outcome of events in some ways. Some players just want to win at challenges. Some want to explore what it might be like to do X or Y, deciding where to go on their own. Some want to make decisions that say things about their characters. Metaplot is bad for this majority of players who want things like this, if and when it makes it so that they can't do those things. So, if I as a player am looking to be creating the plot, then if I'm forced to go along with the events of the metaplot, with no chance of altering them, then I'll be upset.

Worse, if the adventure plot takes us to the point of decision, seems to give it to the players, but assumes that the players will make a particular decision...then we have a real problem. Because you can't give someone the power to make a decision and be sure that they'll make the right one. If you're sure, then there's no real decision being made (and worse, players will rebel and make the "wrong" decision just because they're expected to make the other).

When designing an adventure what you can't do is make the adventure take away the fun decision making that the players like to do. Simple as that. Metaplot often causes this problem - but not neccessarily. If you make it into "history," like Ron says, or make it into backdrop that's not just there for the players to experience, but have their own affect upon, then it's not a problem. Think of it this way, the metaplot of Dragon Pass as presented is of no consequence to a lunar. Yeah, it may impact him, but he doesn't have to worry about the narrator forcing him down a specific rout just to experience certain events. It's just news from afar.

Mike

[Brand_Robins]

Yeah, it may impact him, but he doesn't have to worry about the narrator forcing him down a specific rout just to experience certain events. It's just news from afar.

Until the world blows up. Then it matters.

Of course that means if you aren't going to have the world blow up in your game, you're cool. If, however, you're playing along and the new "the world blows up because of things started in Dragon Pass" book comes out, you may have a few issues with it. At the very least it won't be useful to you, at the most it can be game disruptive.

I posite this situation in this particular example because we are told in the HeroQuest MRB that the world is going to blow up, and that the events leading up to that explosion start in Dragon Pass. We don't, however, get a lot of detail, guidance, or even "comming attractions" action to let us know how it's going to happen.  

So the idea of it mattering/not mattering to a Lunar off in Lunar-land is a bit more complex than you might be positing. To some it certainly won't matter a fig -- they just won't use it. Those who wanted to follow the development of the game, however, may be FUBARed.

Of course, I may also just be overreacting because of my years of Tribe 8.