<< Given that HW will allow players to run characters comparable in ability
to the Coders... >>.
How is this compatible with the claim of many, i.e. that HW is more socially oriented than RQ? Do you mean that every farmer in Glorantha is a Rune Lord, or every crafter an Adept sorcerer? Seems strange...:)
Or perhaps PCs are exceptional people? Again, I don't see how this can encourage integration with the rest of the world. Heroes are, by definition, set apart from the general populace. In general, I'd think that a storytelling system focus on the individual and not on the world (but I know nothing of HW, so maybe I miss something important).
Mikael Raaterova:
<<You don't find it more realistic and intuitive to know that you broke your
leg in the fall, instead of being told that your armour stopped 6 pts of
damage, but that 10 pts still got through to your leg?>>
Is there a rule in RQ that prevents you from storytelling the combat while you play it out? I think not. There is no rule which forces you, either. This is just a question of style. But in the GM book we find:
"Avoid speaking game lingo, use dramatic narrative"
In RQ you don't find crits table as in other games I won't name, because describing damage in actual term is a complicated issue that is best left to GM's improvisation. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be described (it's the same for spells, BTW). There is no rule in the RQ system that encourages you to roleplay (XPs for good roleplay and the like), but since we're talking about a role-playing system I think it is implicit, isn't it?
I'm waiting for elucidating answers and comments. Bye Alex (or Alisander, or Alexandre, or whatever Outlook choose to call metoday!)
End of The Glorantha Digest V6 #537
Powered by hypermail