Rolemaster breaks down at about 10th level and T&T becomes utterly hopeless generally at about 3rd or 4th. I actually think RQ does better than both. And HW does far better.
>I haven't even looked
>at the Hero Wars rules, but judging by the comments of those of you who
>LIKE the rules, it reflects Glorantha "better" than Runequest did. And in
>Gloranthan reality, Heroes kill armies with no risk.
Actual, heroes kill individual members of those armies with no risk. A big difference.
>Greg's "new" Glorantha seems to be a
>world where everything is decided by a few super-powerful characters
>striding about the landscape.
Combat is simply not the be all and end all of HW. Accordingly, the rules chose not to put lots of special cases in so that Timothy trollkin could have a 0.04% chance of killing Harrek rather than a zero. But Tims modestly high levels of Beg for Mercy, Hide, and so on, probably better represent what playing a trollkin is all about. If your game is ruined because your trollkin doesn't have a chance of killing Harrek in HW, thats probably a problem for your game.
Gregs Glorantha has always focused on the heroes, or at least the kings and their companions, if you only read what Greg wrote. Greg writes mostly myth, saga and history. That doesn't mean we are all forced to follow that directly - Glorantha
>So publish the game.
Believe me, I have done a great deal to help that happen. I have sent or received well over 2000 pieces of email concerning HW playtest issues, for example. But fundamentally, publishing does not happen because people complain about it in public - publishing happens because people do a great deal of work, work which I believe is taking place.
>Until you show me the actual mechanics, I have no more rational cause to
>believe your interpretation than you have rational cause to accept my
>misgivings.
But if neither side has rational cause for argument, then surely this is an excellent reasont to drop the issue, rather than bring it up again?
>In other words, you've given me nothing to assuage my fears.
Its become painfully obvious that probably no one can say anything to assuage your fears. Not even 'oh, I ran a great game where we all played trollkin and scrabbled in the mud and fought over scraps, all under HW rules'. Or 'I ran a game full of fascinating roleplaying situations in a mid level tribal context, and the rules really helped the game', which genuinely describes some peoples experiences in playtest.
Personally, I found the HW playtest to be an inspiring roleplaying experience, and not because I ran big heroic level stuff, but because the rules and background made my mid level campaign (players played tribal up and comers - the youngest weaponthane, the third best trader in the tribe, and so on) come alive with character interaction, rich backgrounds, and so on. Working out who was on the tribal ring, major familial relationships, plots based on the interaction of character traits of PCs and NPCs. Great stuff. And the HW rules definately helped, by encouraging me to think in different ways.
Hero Wars is part of a big trend in the games industry to freeform rules, less emphasis on the details of combat, and rules that adapt well to a variety of uses. Over The Edge, for example, shares these characteristics. Despite the fact that munchkinising your character is trivially easy in OTE if your GM lets you (hey, can I put my primary ability in 'invisible look of death?'), its known for interesting plots, roleplaying intensive play, and general coolness (not to mention extreme weirdness, but thats the intent of the setting/genre). Robin Laws, perhaps the best game designer working in the RPG field at the moment, deliberately took these ideas from games like OTE (which he worked on) and Pendragon because he knew how they worked in practice. And, while some people will make horrible use of the HW rules, for most people it will help them to roleplay what they want better.
I do think that Hero Wars combat may be a little too bland for many peoples taste - I wish Robin had put a little more 'Feng Shui' flavour in the mix somehow - but thats a minor flaw in a great game, and one easily remedied with a few house rules (or later rules expansions). But its a minor quibble with a game that encourages roleplaying, encourages creativity in the players, and inspires good play.
>Thus, wonderful things like Gimpy's may be
>preserved through mere inertia, but we'll see nothing new of such
>vintage.
Only if we fail to write it. Cheers David ------------------------------
Powered by hypermail