John
As a complete curveball, you could always run a game set in a
traditional homeland and have pre-generated characters. Just so
folks could see how the game runs. It removes the focus on the
rules that character gen gives you: just choose a character and
play.
Its something that I wish I had done with my AD&D mates. The
tendency is to try and replicate a D&D character, which is a mistake
frankly. Best give them an example of Glorantha inplay.
Puts on RHQN hat: Mail me off list if you want some ideas for demo
scenario's with sample characters.
FWIW I used a martial artist against my Heortling players, and
wupped the best fighters ass! But then he did have 10M4 in Seventh
Level of Lunar Concioussness Dragon Fist Martial Arts! - which only
ever has 7 acknowledged masters at any one time. My whole concept
was Crouching Tiger/ Hidden Dragon.
Regards
Rob
wrote:
>
> I am hoping to introduce HQ to a group of people that I play D&D
with.
> One of them will almost certainly want to play a monk (or as
close to
> a martial artist as the game system will allow) and since I am
unaware
> of any such occupation description I would like to use it as an
> example of how flexible HQ can be at tailoring a 'class' to suit
the
> character concept.
>
> Has anyone already seen (or created) a kung-fu style character,
and if
> so, how did they (you) do it?
>
> I have no problem with either modifying an occupation like 'foot
> soldier' or making one up from scratch but I keep fluctuating
between
> - skills
> - talents
> - wizardry's mechanism
> - Theism's mechanism
> when it comes to representing the various martial styles and
> disciplines.
>
> This could all get more complex depending on whether or not he
wants
> magic at all, as an extension of his 'martial arts', or as a
seperate
> add on.
>
> Ultimately I will have to wait to hear what he does and doesn't
want
> before deciding on too much but I feel that prepping the pros and
cons
> of the various approaches will be time well spent and I would
> appreciate any help that people can supply in this area.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - John