>Michael Cule wrote:
>>Take the damn Status Point mechanic and give it a *real playtest*!
>>Throw it at some idiot players, some conservative players and some
>>cynical players and see what you get. Better yet dump it entirely...
>Our playtest mix of cynical, conservative idiots rather *liked* the
>Status Point mechanic, especially after discovering how versatile it
>could be. That combat was no longer the only dramatic, edge-of-your-seat
>sort of activity available impressed them all immensely. Not a one had
>trouble understanding the concept, and not a one felt it detracted from
>roleplay.
>to determine how easily a mechanic might be comprehended by
>players of all walks. What do you suppose he think is a "real playtest"?
>One which confirms his own views? Hmmm...
Not sure I want to say anything in the battle of the Michaels....
First, I want to say I've only seen HW in the pages of the digest. Without
seeing it in action I think Status Point mechanic sounds great, I like the
idea
of better mechanics for debates, persuasions, etc...
But Michael Crule did have a good point about playtesting. I'm not
dogging the
specific playtesting of HW, but there is a lot of variations in players and an
industry history of sometimes missing the mark in playtesting. While simple
in concept, the SP mechanic seems to have a lot of sutile aspects. I'd like
to see
how a GM does with a group of newbies, not only to Glorantha but to
roleplaying.
Also how teenagers take to it, which seems to be the age many are introduced
to roleplaying.
I say this because we all have hopes for HW to really take off and be
considered
a major RP system. Because if it does, the Issaries will have the money to
support lots of products, and we will see HW at local and regional game
cons. Also because
we have hopes for it to be a system to take FRP to new heights.
Pete
Powered by hypermail