What decide of the time spent on a challenge is not the number of HP of the monster but the emotional interest of the scene and the time you wish to allocate to it.
You are to decide if you want to resolve something in 1 action or attach more importance to it. In Conan or in SW or others the director decide that climbing the stair meeting guards /reaching the spaceship with Storm troopers will take only a few minutes of the movie time. You roll a simple contest and depending on the level of success/failure you describe the run with some exchanged blows, or the capture of the characters and you move to the next scene.
On a fast running scene the goal of the contest can/should be more high level to keep the pace fast (reaching your spaceship). On a slow running and high intensity scene each meter or small action count to keep the thrill (taking the door, breaking the door security, retreating as the enemy barrage fire, taking a good shoot at the enemy, running for your life, starting your spaceship ... ).
There was a subject on this list I think about running a Dungeon crawl in HQ2. If you can put your hand on it in the archive it could also help you, But the general idea is that HQ2 is more oriented to running the Moria run in LotR the movie or book way than with the grity details of a D&D fight.
Another big difference I see is that HQ2 focus on the PC actions/goals and less on the NPC action. While the GM describe the goal of NPC, the action is driven by the PC action. No long minutes where the DM chooses the right kind of attack his monster will try to do.
Manuel
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 3:21 PM, rlbeaver <rlbeaver_at_...> wrote:
>
>
> 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:
>
> - There's one resolution mechanic that is not modified by another rule.
> While D&D has one resolution mechanic, the rules of how it's applied are
> modified depending on the action, for instance grapple.
>
> - Step H2 above give players more "say" in successful results.
>
> 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.
>
>
> --- In HeroQuest-RPG_at_yahoogroups.com <HeroQuest-RPG%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "orlanthumathi" <anti.spam_at_...> wrote:
> >
> > Not online that I know of. What is it that is not clicking? What kind of
> game have you played before? What kind of game do you have in mind for hq?
> >
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Powered by hypermail