Re: Actual Rules Question!

From: Frank Rafaelsen <rafael_at_...>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 12:08:14 +0100 (CET)


On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Steve Lieb wrote:

> I mean in an immediate sense. I challenge you to find ANYONE who
> engaged in a RQ3 melee with, oh, lets say 10 underlings, coming out of
> THAT COMBAT better off than they started...?

You didn't challenge me, so I'm not going to take it up. I wouldn't be able to, anyway. But that is a problem with RQ3!

I don't only find the HW mechanics mythically appropriate (in glorantha the act of killing could very well enable you to take part in/be filled with/become DEATH), I also find it 'realistic' (blah, the 'R' word).

To use an example from role-playing: We all know that being a Game Master (or should I say narrator? :) is a draining and exhausting experience, right? We should be at our best in the beginning and only get worse from there, right?

I say, no way. That is not how things work. I'm a way better GM in the finishing stages of an extremely intense combat scene than I'm after a short break in the action. Or a week later, for that matter.

Both fighting (I imagine :) and GMing are activities you immerse yourself in (like play, actually). Exhaustion or fatigue be damned, when one is on a roll one can be a lot better/more skilled than in the beginning.

Did I mention that I like HW? :)

Ha en god dag!
Frank Rafaelsen

Powered by hypermail