Re: RQ v. HW v. HQ1 v HQ2

From: ttrotsky2 <TTrotsky_at_...>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 17:39:40 -0000

Ashley Munday:
>
> Trotsky he say:
>
> "...the Pass/Fail Cycle is one of the things that I like least about
HQ2."
>
> I find this fairly interesting 'cause virtually every GM I've talked
> to/corresponded with/played with in the last 25 years has used a pass
> fail cycle in their games*.

I'll admit to occasionally fudging things for the needs of the game - it's one reason I wouldn't want pure simulationism. But I don't like doing it, so a system that formalises the whole process, and insists I do it pretty much all the time, is a system that's taking a niggling unpleasantness and trying to make a virtue of it. Not my thing at all.

Although, unlike you, I have corresponded with a few non-teen GMs that claim never to fudge anything, and let the chips fall where they may. But not many, I agree!

-- 
Trotsky
Gamer and Skeptic

------------------------------------------------------
Trotsky's RPG website: http://www.ttrotsky.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
Not a Dead Communist: http://jrevell.blogspot.com/