Re: Re: DnD4e to HQ2 (was Greetings)

From: Trotsky <TTrotsky_at_...>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 10:47:01 +0100


qualonargn wrote:
>
>
> Many seem to insist that HQ2 or pass/fail-cycle leads to riduculous
> resitances.
>

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would certainly not claim this.

> There�s nothing to stop you from having a scale for the skills (as
> per HQ1) and setting challenges that are naturally on a suitable level
> of difficulty.
>

Perhaps not, but there's no tools to assist with this - nor do there need to be if you're playing the game as seems to be intended. Which isn't the same as saying the pass-fail cycle is mandatory at all times, because clearly it isn't. You can legitimately say "I don't care where we are in the pass-fail cycle, that's going to be difficult" (and published scenarios often do exactly this), but that's not the same as saying "I don't care how good the characters are, climbing this wall has a difficulty of 10W", which the rules do not encourage, or, frankly, need to encourage.

-- 
Trotsky
Gamer and Skeptic

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

Powered by hypermail