> I'm sure it would be a *constructive* set of alternative
> rules, aimed at those who recognise some of the problems but want
to
> play HeroQuest anyway.
> Of course, I'm sure the authors of such an article would
> prefer the problems were not there at all, and were dealt with
before
> the game hit print, but publishing a constructive article about how
> to fix them seems preferable to ignoring them and hoping no one
> outside this list notices them!
> Face it - if HQ stands or falls on the mathematical gamist
> soundness of its rules, and its appeal to those who care about such
> things, its already failed. Luckily, it doesn't - it stands or
falls
Point taken.
> on the success of its innovative approach and its fantastic
> background. The (apparently not very large or important) group that
> both appreciate the games good points AND want the maths to work
> right I'm sure will be happy with some house rules to go with their
> books full of cool background and adventures, and happy to plug the
> games best points in any article about it.
> Cheers
> David (who knows nothing about the HQ rules except
> what has been mentioned on this list, and sincerely hopes they
won't
> be broken at all.)
Sounds good to me. I really, really phrased my comments badly, for which I appologize. I am just remembering how some highly negative and nasty Hero Wars reviews (which, admittedly was deeply flawed) hit various online groups and gaming web-sites _before_ HW was on the retailer's shelves. I was hoping that wouldn't happen again. =(
Heck, for what its worth, I suspect a home-brew attempt at GURPS Glorantha might amuse folks on Pyramid far more than anything I might attempt though with the 2000 word article limit, I suspect one would have to stick to philosophy.
Sincerely,
Jeff
Powered by hypermail