>Subject: Re: Re: Feats and their Descriptions

From: t.s.baguley_at_...
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:12:26 +0100

>Because the description is just gloss. When you know it doesn't
>actually matter in the game, one runs out of enthusiasm for
>piling it on with the same zeal as might otherwise be the case,
>that's my experience. This is true in many a system, but in
>HW, description is _crucial_, and any process that would help that
>is, IMO, a jolly good idea. Encouraging 'samey' behaviour from
>the players, with as little descriptive effort as they can get away
>with, is highly counterproductive.
>
>Cheers,
>Alex.

I don't think it is _necessarily_ just gloss. First you can weaken the AP bid input from the players (by assigning bids to descriptions, or overruling inappropriate bids). Second, you can use the descriptions to generate situational modifiers (I'd point people to Feng Shui for good ideas here). This happens in most games I've played (at least most of those without minatures). Third, descriptions can be used to provide one-shot augments (running for charges and so on). Fourth, HPs should only be spent on heroic actions. Fifth, HPs should only be gained by heroic actions. All these are both in the spirit and in several cases also the letter of the rules. (The second point is probably most important).

There are some problems with the bid mechanic for some groups of players in some situations (e.g, equal abilities + cautious players). However, it also clear that a number of other groups are enjoying the rules as written. The suggested fixes I've seen would not work for all groups IMO, but are appropriate as house rules.

Thom