> I've been following some of this debate for a
> while. I'm an old RQ-er but I've not played HW
> yet and have only read over the basic rules as
> are downloadable from Issaries. I want to raise
> a question on the subject of archery that
> bothered me in RQ and seems as relevant here
> too.
The big difference between RQ and HW is that in RQ the rules are detailed as to how contests are run whereas in HW, the narrator and players can determine how detailed a contest is.
I will get to answering your archery question (sort of) later. But first bear with me while I talk about the big picture.
First you should work out when to use each of the 4 resolution mechanics.
In HW, an extended contest goes into the detail of a particular part of the story. This mechanic should be used for any part of the story that the narrator and/or players agree is exciting and the results are important to all. In my opinion, an extended contest should only be used once (or maximum) twice per session.
A simple contest is used where the results are reasonably important but no-one is particularly interested in the detail of how that result was achieved.
An ability test is used where the results are uncontested - no resistance or the resistance is negligible.
Frequently, narrative declaration can be used. Player: "I want to kill the lone guard silently so he cannot raise the alarm". Narrator: "Done. What next?"
If you and your players are interested in detailed combat, then the big set piece of your session can be the climatic combat. But you choose how detailed your descriptions of each action are. If you like descibing each blow then you can. If you like describing the tactical situation then you can equally describe it at that level.
So, to get back to your question about archery, feel free to choose one of the options given or to work out your own solution. In our game, we are low on combat realism but tend to work the debates through in detail.
regards,
Charles
Powered by hypermail