Absolutely.
>What's needed is that HQ numbers follow a clear, functional, and
>systematic logarithmic structure ; in fact, the exact same structure that
>Robin Laws devised in the basic rules system.
hear hear.
>Unfortunately, those of us who have in the past advocated this (viz.
>Wealth thread passim) have AFAICS not been listened to.
>
>Greg and others seem to feel that sensible logarithmy is "simulationist"
>and constitutes a misunderstanding of the game, and game system. I can
>assure them that this is not the case.
Absolutely. I've almost given up hope on any sensible concensus on the rules, because virtually all HW rules debates seem to come down the camp that understands the rules are logarithmic and thinks that many of the problems can be fixed with a proper understanding of that, and the camp that thinks that all problems with the rules boil down to people not understanding that the answer to all problems is that narrativism can make the problem an advantage.
I personally think more people should understand that emphasising narrative over the simulationist and gamist does not mean that breaking the gamist and simulationist parts of the game is therefore a bonus. Anymore than a heavily gamist or simulationist game is helped by an idiot plot.
The gamist and simulationist aspects of HW should be minimalist. Which is not the same thing as broken.
Here is one rule for HW game design that would solve many problems - never ever multiple a HW TN unless you have a solid mathematical, not narrative reason, to do so. Your mathematical reason should include an explicit justification for an exponential effect. Feel free to make your additive bonus much larger instead when tempted to use a multiplier - it will do less damage in the end. If a rule turns out, on close inspection, to be having this effect, dump it.
Here is another meta-rule. A large difference in base TNs should always be a huge advantage in a contest. If that messes with your narrative, either solve the problem narratively or come up with a sit mod. Rules that make factors other than TN more important than a large different in TN are wrong. A small difference in TN can and should be overcome by clever play, a large AP advantages, a bid edge etc. But large TN advantages (say, a level of mastery) should always be hard to beat despite all other things.
Cheers David
Powered by hypermail