Ooook....
I got varying responses on the Intent or Action question, but many of
the answers agreed on that either is Intent all-important, or you may
not gain as big a success if you do not have the right intent. Some
said almost the opposite, though.
Some further questions and comments:
- The Pendragon Trait mechanic - yes, I realised that this might be
exactly the place to use it. I just wondered if there was some honest
way to avoid using it, since my players hate it.
- Peter Metcalfe and I disagree as usual. I don't believe that it is
impossible for others than Logicicians or Illuminates to be
calcualting on their HQ. The reason is somewhat wuss: I cannot see
how to roleplay it properly. Perhaps you could use the Pendragon
mechanic, but ALWAYS roll at every situation, and FORCE the player to
act according to the roll (unlike normal Pendragon) but if I tried
that my players would kill me slowly in a way pleasing to Ikadz
(figuratively, of course).
- Yes, I was aware that quests don't look exactly as they use to
every time. But if the quester knows that he is to act in a certain
way, he will try to do so, no matter what the circumstances. If I
meet a wounded wolf, I'll say: "Ah, that's just Leo in disguise -
gotcha!" and heal the critter.
- I did not think of "creative heroquesting". I thought of the
normal, honest-to-Gods HQ that is the essence of most important
religious ceremonies in Glorantha.
The problem is that of foreknowledge. In many cases of non-creative
HQ (or, in banal terms: "You've gotta run this scenario before you
get this cool power") I get the impression that you know which myth
you are following. You doesn't know all of it, but you know the main
parts.
People performing creative (as in "never before performed") HQ
doesn't have this problem, same thing with people who unwittingly
step into HQ.
But I'd like to use HQ-mechanics for people learning Rune Magic, etc,
and then I think it is a problem.
Erik Sieurin