Re: Question about play

From: rlbeaver <rlbeaver_at_...>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 13:21:58 -0000


My experience is mostly crunchy games D&D 3.5, Pathfinder, GURPS, Burning Wheel, and WHFRP 1st ed. In lighter games, I have played Savage Worlds, Hero's Banner, Mouse Guard.

It's difficult for me to clearly state what's not clicking. I guess it's more of how abstracted skill and conflict resolution is compared to games like D&D. In attempting to understand it, I wrote up below:

In my reading of it, it really doesn't seem that different as far as play, there's just a single resolution mechanic.

For instance, using a combat conflict, my interpretation of play is:

H1. GM Describes Situation
H2. Players describe what they would like the outcome to be and what

     actions (skills) they are going to use to achieve it.

H3.  GM Describes opponent's actions
H4.  Dice are rolled, results applied
H5.  If player/opponent not defeated, goto step 2

If the player's action were "I Kill it with my BFG" and they had a high enough margin of success, then combat is over in "one roll". As compared to D&D, it would go:

D1.  GM Describes Situation
D2.  GM Determines order of actions
D3.  Player/opponent describe action they are attempting
D4.  Dice are rolled, results applied
D5.  If player/opponent not defeated, goto Step 3 for 

    next player/opponent

It would be very rare for combat to end without at least one iteration.

My interpretation of HQ's strengths are:

If that's it, then it just clicked as I was writing this, if not, then I'm still lost and will just have to try and find a game in the open gaming at GenCon.

Powered by hypermail