> I played this weekend too. Ran a battle for a village. It
>involved 7 PCs and the 10 NPCs on their side against the many, >many
more than that on the other side. Took 30+ rounds.
> It took us about 2 hours.
> It's style -- player style, GM style, the style of your
>interactions, etc. -- not the system(*) that will determine how long
>it takes to run any particular encounter.
I disagree. Did you realy work through each strike rank for each participant for every round of combat? How about fatigue loss and effects? Did you remember bleeding damage for the wounded?
Maybe I'm maligning you, but I think what you mean by 'style' is to what extent you actual applied the RQ rules in all their pedantic niggly detail. Now, I do exactly the same thing, I've adjusted the set of rules I actualy use to suit my style of gaming. However when you're comparing two writen sets of rules it's the rules as writ that should be judged. After all this is what a newcomer to the game is going to be presented with. If they haven't played a roleplaying game before, then they don't have a style of their own yet, so the style presented in the body of the rules is going to be their starting point.
>From that point of view I'd much rather introduce new players to
Glorantha using Hero Wars than RQ3.
Simon Hibbs
Powered by hypermail