I don't immediately pick up the reference. Is this another Issaries con-demo scenario?
> On the other hand, the final confrontation was flat and fairly
> disappointing. Part of the problem was that the character managed to
> summon up a 15-person Char-Un cavalry contingent, which meant that I
> had to beef up the opposing forces, which led to more of a group
> combat than I necessarily wanted. But even aside from that the bid
> system, etc, lacked a certain level of flavor.
That would be a challenge in most systems, to be fair. I'd have been tempted to try and 'factor out' the Char-Uns as much as possible: resolve their actions collectively, then do the PCs in much more detail. (*noise of die roll, off* "The cavalry charge takes out three of the opposition, and they set about the rest with their sidearms. 8 of the remainder then engage you guys.")
> In sum I'd say: roleplaying good, combat bad. Currently my group is
> contemplating grafting RQ combat and HW character creation &
> non-combat together; whether this unholy merger would work is another
> question.
Something like KAP combat would perhaps be worth looking at as a halfway house, or at least the starting point for a model of one, which would maybe require less intricate micro-surgery than RQ proper. Use hand-rolled abilities rather than fixed stats, keep the HW die roll convention (which frankly works a darn sight better than Pendragon's), add in armour, weapon, and tactical option rules to taste.
A direct combination of HW and RQ would be problematic. They'd meet without ever really touching, frankly.
> Member of a secret cult that maintains that Sheng Seleris was the
> last Yelmic emperor.
But what's their actual secret? Surely this comes under 'common knowledge'. ;-)
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail