>From what I've seen, HW will be nothing but a mine for Glorantha
>information. No way to play grubby Ducks scrabbling for klacks alongside
>grubbier Trollkin scrabbling for bolgs. Pity.
[Scratches Head] Why on earth not? What featrues of the HW game mechanics lead you to believe this? What features of the game prevent it?
>I've seen games that allegedly scale between Jimmy Olsen and Darkseid.
>Hell's Bells! I play such games. Guess what--they always invariably
>fall quite flat at the Jimmy Olsen level. Keeping the numbers sane at
>the Darkseid level means that the Jimmy Olsen level has a preposterously
>coarse granularity.
Ok, HW skills in the sub-mastery scale are in a range of 1-20, but RQ2 has skills increments of 5% which gives pretty much the same effect. In fact HW has the same granulrity at this scale as Pendragon or any other D20 based game system. There is nothing to stop you running a game where staring skills are in the 5-10 point range, and gaining a full mastery is as rare as a skill of 100% in RQ. You could quite easily run an entire campaign in HW with no characters ever gaining a mastery, if that's what you and your players want.
So, how granular is too granular? I can understand it if you prefer a percentile based game system, but it's not as though basing a game on a 1-20 scale is unplayably simplistic. It hasn't done AD&D or Pendragon any harm.
It seems to me your objection is based not on any asessment of HW itself, but on unrelated assumptions. "Other games failed, so Hero Wars has failed before it's published, or I've even read it." Hardly a convincing argument.
Simon Hibbs
End of The Glorantha Digest V7 #367
Powered by hypermail