Is cough medicine the only (legal) drug worth taking now or what?
:)
No need to crack the book, Mike. Apparently, I was misinterpreting what I read. Glad I put in all those "I think(s)"! In any case, that's the way I've always *run* characters augmenting other characters and that's the way I've always played it too. I've never augmented another character without rolling for it.
(Now, there's a first time for everything I'm sure...)
(from Mike)
--- In HeroQuest-rules_at_yahoogroups.com, "Mike Holmes"
<homeydont_at_h...> wrote:
> >From: "bigblackcatmail" <bigblackcatmail_at_y...>
>
> >Otherwise, simple contests are way open to abuse, IMO.
>
> How so?
>
Simple. Two characters. One gets singled out by a bully NPC for a fight but has a lower combat rating that the other character. So the other character does the fight with the weaker character augmenting (instead of the weaker character supplying the base and the stronger character supplying the augment). As a result, there's no need for the weaker character to EVER boost his combat abilities if he stays with the stronger character. Better yet, there's no penalty for it either. If a follower augments in a contest and the contest fails, they take one level of damage worse than the main PC. If a PC is augmenting another PC, what happens? Maybe they're *supposed* to take damage like a follower but I've never seen it in practice.
Conceivably, a group could have the Mage, Fighter, Thief, Cleric lineup and never have to worry about any holes. The Fighter would always fight. The Mage would always spellcast/research. The Thief would always check for traps. And as long as the group doggedly stayed in relative proximity, each character could augment with everything from any relevant ability under the sun to relationships to the group member to personality traits, magic, etc.
What's to stop a group from doing that? If the average player can drum up a +5 augment (and that's a weak estimate, IMO) for any old contest and can always count on at least a +3 (if not a full +5) from every other player, then (with a group of 4 players) we're looking at a shift of +17 (more if you add in for group combat) which is at least an extra mastery *on every challenge*. Yikes!
>From a GM stanpoint, this may not seem like such a big deal. Just
modify the augments, yadda yadda yadda. But from a player's
standpoint, this bites the big one. Think how screwed I'd be if my
super-cool, staff-fightin' amazon were with a group that decided the
resident mountain man should be the base for all our combats (because
even with a -10 mod, his 5w2 "Strong" beats out my 2w Staff Fightin'
by a wide margin). So whenever combat comes up, I help out with my +2
augment while the mountain man gets to do all the fun rollin' and
resolution. The only thing my amazon would get the to roll for in a
party like that would be for "Lookin' Good in a Bikini 19". (insert
eyerolls here)
Granted, I've never seen a group do that. In most of the games I've played, players have tended to stay separate, working on their own storylines. But what's to stop a group from trying something like this, beyond GM fiat? When I ran HQ, my groups stayed together. Not for lack of me trying to get them to do their own thing either. They just habitually (and religiously) refused to split up. Had they had the option to just add all their abilities together willy-nilly, it would've been a calamity (and rife with complaints over how Player A with "Whack 'em" at 17 never gets to do anything because Player B has "Stomp 'em" at 2w...
At least with a variable augment, the additional players get to *do* something, in my line of thinking. Keep in mind, part of the "fun" in HeroQuest is in describing what happens. I think GM's (in all rpgs) can lose track of that. If all other players get to do is hand over augments, we'd see one combat/debate/smooth talkin' monster monopolizing all the spotlight. IMO, that's were "abuse" kicks in.
So, if PCs support other PCs *do* they take an extra level of damage like a Follower? It would seem as if they should (if for no other reason than to discourage willy-nilly augments).
(from Mike)
> Well,that would be in line with the AP lending rules, yes. However,
though
> I've often required variable augment rolls, I've also just gone
with
> straight augments in these situations when player hero helps player
hero. In
> fact, I think I go that way more often than requiring a roll.
Honestly, the whole AP lending thing is probably why I got it fixed in my head that PC's couldn't auto-augment each other in the first place (my bad). It's never fun to find out that you've been wrong all along. :)
Still, I prefer the consistency of AP lending and variable augments for other PCs. I would reconsider my take on auto-augments between PCs if it did turn out that those supplying the auto-augment took damage like followers from failures. But I've never seen it treated that way.
At least with Follower-style damage there's some degree of gambling to the whole affair (in most cases). And it would be consistent, which has always been one of HQ's strongpoints (for me at least).
Anyone else got a book handy?
Thanks.
Scott
Powered by hypermail