I wasn't at Convulsion(or whatever it's called) but I know people who were there.
<snip>
> So there is an old scenario adapted to HQ2 format in HiG? That could be
> useful for us to look at.
Actually, not yet but I'm assured by Newt that it's heading for issue 3. It's not specifically written for 2.0 but as I became aware of the HQ2 approach whilst writing it up and as my original notes became more "loose" as the game went on, the later parts of the write-up are more "statless" than the opening scenes. However, it doesn't formally use the HQ2 terminology. The one I'm writing will, though, albeit I don't have a publishing route in mind for it.
<snip>
>
> So scenes, at least, are laid out as possible tasks with "what you get
> if you roll what". Not too dissimilar from the previous ideas.
Well that's how I'm doing it but I'm quite sure other approaches are equally if not more appropriate.
>
> I think (I may be out of line here) what those of us asking to see this
> were hoping for was more of how the use of the sliding scale and
> Pass/Fail and whatever mysterious things those of us who are unlikely to
> ever see the book keep hearing about are used to scenario construct.
>
Short of what the descriptors actually are (and I can't remember them exactly) I don't think there IS a lot more to it than "this task is likely to be Difficult" where Difficult is a specified level of increase (+6 was it?) to the base resistance specified at the start of the game.
Richard
Powered by hypermail