I am engaged on a discussion of the Extended AP system in uk.games.roleplay under the "Heroquest - at Convulsion UK Convention" - feel free to drop in and give your thoughts. Curently it is:
Michael Cule
Argue eloquently against Extended Contest: 7W2
vs
Graham Spearing
Think extended contests might be Ok: 13
Below is a summary of Michael's well argued concerns with APs and my thoughts interspersed. I wondered if people here could give me a hand. the concerns can be summarised as:
"The Extended contest AP mechanic applies an overly complex bidding system onto a narrative game which diverts unhelpfully from the flow of a storytellng game. Being wounded and using missile weapons seem to be badly modelled using this system."
This may be old hat to you knowing types, but I want to give the game a go as Narrator, and have some concerns over the extended contests. I'll be at Convulsion so look me up, sit me down with a pint and explain it all to me!
Here's the discusson - any thoughts or help appreciated. And if you are over here too Michael - hello! hope this cross post is Ok :-)
Michael Cule wrote:
[Does the HW AP mechanic help make for exciting conflict resolution?]
> Well, my problem is that in my opinion simulation and storytelling
> support each other in a good role-playing game. Let me explain.
[snip]
On board for all of that. I've never taken the view that just because you use a good simulationist system, that it can't be narrative driven game.
> Now I don't have problems with abstracted systems as such: OVER THE
> EDGE, UNKNOWN ARMIES and EVERWAY are all pretty abstract and not much
> concerned with the finer points of what sort of weapon you carry or what
> sort of armour you're wearing. And I love all three systems perhaps
> because their mechanics don't make judgements about what sort of results
> they are supposed to produce.
I have two of these and I agree they are fine games. I am about to run a Spherewalker game and was wondering whether to use HW because I want to give it a go, and I thought the more traditional clunky mechanics and dice rolling might actually be preferred by my players. I've run Everway before and whereas I love it, and the less 'serious' roleplayer thinks it is wonderful, my hardcore friends couldn't come to terms with it at all. This could be as much to do with the new age background as the system.
> that shouldn't be there. The story-telling aspects are burdened with
> this peculiar gambling game that isn't obvious and doesn't help the
> players or the GM focus on what is actually happening in the game world.
This is what a couple of my current players found. I was a player with them but sort of 'got it' towards the end of the HW game that one of my friends was GMing. Suddenly understanding what the AP mechanic was there for, I used it to help accentuate my descriptions of what I was doing. When I wanted to bid high and take more risks I pushed it with the description of what I was attempting. Something had to 'click' (or is that 'snap'?) before I switched from my RQ mentality over to the more abstract view of an exciting combat sequence. It stayed exciting for me.
> To be fair when I tried it with my players it was a playtest version and
> a few of the bugs were fixed but there remain the following problems.
A tautology to say that the AP mechanic may only work if all the players are comfortable with the game, how it works, and aren't coming with any RQesque bagage. I'm sure you ran the game well, and I'm equally sure that I really can't run it with my current gaming group who, mostly, simply loath the AP contest.
> 1) You are not supposed to tell players what their state of wounds are
> until the end of any combat.
All abstracted, I agree. I've developed a 'feel the blood' variant that gets round this, but wonder if I'm therefore missing the point.
> 2) There is no real means of changing tactics during a combat because
> your pool of APs is based upon the skill you started with. (As far as I
> can tell.)
I think here that the switching of skill may force the opponent to switch to an alternative defensive skill which they are, potentially, crap at. Although your AP total is based on the first skill you try, you may find the contest swings your way as you outwit your opponent by going for one of his weaknesses. That's the theory. It would have to work for me in the narrative flow, and I probably won't be able to conceive this working until I actually GM the game!
> 3) The AP mechanic simply doesn't work with missile combat. At all. I
> fire some arrows at my enemy and because I miss my range of possible
> actions is reduced when he gets to me? I can even be 'defeated' because
> I started out shooting at him before he reached me? Why?
Because from the musical score and a number of well judged camera angles, you've given the audience the impression your a bit crap. Er, no. No, I can't find a way round this one :-). Help someone?!
> If I've focused on combat, it's because that's where the most intense
> moments of role-playing often happen. But the weaknesses are there in
> most situations.
I agree it has to work here. I also have concerns about the AP mechanic. I appreciate it should only be used sparingly, but if it doesn't help it won't get used at all. I'll probably have to try it out for myself with a new group of players.
> I loved the char-gen and the advancement systems and
> I'm sure I could have sold my players on the vagueness of the stats. But
> the central mechanic sucked little nanny goats (to use the vernacular)
> and I would not want to have anything to do with it, at all, at all.
Thanks for the detailed post Michael. There's such alot of the game that I like; it seems a shame to ditch it because of one aspect. Ok, alright already, it's rather a big aspect.
And also to the others of you that have played or GMed HW: have you found the AP mechanics to be a useful way of measuring the eb and flow of combat in a fun supportive way?
Cheers
Powered by hypermail