Dear Group!
I donīt want to get on everybodies nerves,but I fear I have to repeat
some things again....
I still think that the whole left and rightbrain therory is most
essential to HW.The left brain is for causal thinking,which is most
dominant in our world.We have very few uses for analog thinking.
Also I disagree,that HW uses the gamemechanics of „oldfashioned"games.
In RQ,for instance,you had Abilities that could only do very defined
things and never anything else.,the skillpercantage was more or
less,an indicator with what probability you would succeed,nothing
more.
In HW an ability is more an associationpool,and the rating,a symbol
for the quality of skill and possibility.If we had a more complex
language,we could play HW without numbers,just by using descriptive
words for skillevels.
So thatīs why Iīm persisting that HW is absolutely different than any
former roleplayinggame.In fact I think it is revolutionary.
Iīm,as a hobby,interested in philosophy.You have the greek:hermes
trimegestos,who kind of „invented"the leftbrained,analog thinking and
gave us some laws.
To show you the difference between causal and analog thinking,I can
make up chains.So what have a horse,a prosperous,a bull,an ounce of
silver and a 2m jump in common?Nothing apparently in the way we are
used to think....
But in HW terms(and analog thinking) they all have the same
quality,that is 5W!So there is something that connects all these
things(and that is information).
Further,analog adding works differently than causal adding.Qualities
can not be added the way we are used to from numbers.Especially not
when we have numbers that are symbols for qualities.
Okay,you might say,that a number is always a symbol and always an
abstraction,but still itīs different.
A quality can only be added to another quality,when we assess,what
would be the quality of both of them together.Thatīs why we need
something that helps us,to better assess qualityratings.Everybody
knows,that all the targetnumbers or numbers in general,are staged-the
higher the better.But still the rules behind that staging are too
vague to use them easily in gameplay.
The rules speak of skills with: normal ability,journeyman-like
ability,masterability,heroability and godlikeability(with some more
categories like lesser and greater gods).So,to judge abilities and
feats(levels of difficulty)is fairly easy,just by asking :"how much
training would that feat need,to be accomplished?"
When it comes to costratings,you have to go a little bit
further,abstracting even more.Building a house is costrating
10W,because it needs the ability of a journeyman(for the masterylevel)
and is a basic in itīs category(building)(thatīs why itīs „sub"level
10).
A bit more tricky are animals,they must be judged by usefulness,I
think.So a pig is rather simple(5),a cow is more usefull because you
have more possibilities of using it (meat,fat,skin,milk,also:bigger
than a pig),the horse gets into the next category of one
mastery,because it is of a significant,longterm use(you can travel
far and quick with it),sill itīs simple in itīs category.
Next comes adding.If you have one pig,it is worth:5.If you have some
more pigs,I think your wealth will not necessarily increase very
much,but if you have male and female pigs,you will be able to
increase your wealth alot more,because it is much more worth.
Still this is a bit sketchy,but this is the reason why Iīm
comitting,because I hope the other groupmembers could help,to better
define the „exact"meaning of numbers and qualityratings and levels!
We should really forget a bit about the numbers as
statistics,everything in HW is a matter of a quality.You have
different degrees in skilltests,like marginal successes or total
failures-this is quality,not a number.You have no wounds,you have
adescription of woundings in abstract terms.(also there is no rule
for adding up wounds,because there is no need for it).
The only role that numbers play on HW is,when it comes to a
description of quality.We could use words instead,but itīs easier
with numbers,because we live in a causal world,where we like precise
definitions.A description with words would confuse a lot of
people,because they wouldnīt be able to distinguish as good as they
can disstinguish numbers.
These are my thoughts so far.I would really apreciate to see
somebody,commiting his or hers personal description of
qualityratings.I donīt care how precise these suggestions will bemaybe
just brainstorming so that we,alltogether can try to make up a
universal table.
Later...
Just to make a start,I made a table with some of the existing values
from the rulesbook.So you have different categories with one glance
next to one another,which suits my purposes for comparing and
assessing better.I translated all the words from the german
rulesversion,because I donīt own the english original-hope I made no
big mistakes.
Much more later...:-)
Hmm,the table didnīt appear like I made it,in the e-mail,I donīt know
why.I will try to post it under files.
I hope somebody has a use for my table and wants to add one or
another category.
peace
Christian