Re: How about a sample conversion to HQ2?

From: David Dunham <david_at_...>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 07:48:51 -0700


Matthew

>Could you give us an idea as to how different the final version of HQ2 is?

No, not easily. There was about two months of polish between the Continuum draft and the submission to Moon Design (and I've since sent a revision based on additional playtesting).

As a result some of the recent "HQ 2.0" discussion is moot, referring to material that will not be published.

In spirit, the game is the same. But we did our best to improve it, thanks to feedback on the Continuum draft. So some particulars are different. Which means that ultimately, trying to present the new game in terms of an obsolete draft is a bad idea.

John

>Everyone is a bit details-starved that the moment. I don't even really
>care about the mechanics per se - I am curious about what else is in
>the book: advice, ideas, partially formed settings.

I know everyone wants to know more about HQ 2.0, or at least to know more about the release date. But it's been summarized already, and it's not up to me to discuss Moon Design's plans.

I will say that there is a lot of advice on using the rules, but in fact the examples have changed a bit during the process.

I really don't want to throw water on the enthusiasm -- I think Robin considerably improved the new rules in a number of ways. You will get to see them! But you deserve the real thing.

-- 

David Dunham
Glorantha/HQ/RQ page: www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html

Powered by hypermail