Hi Ash! :^)
>
> Rob describes HQ as "narrativist." But if you read the
> rules, there's a lot more "gamism" lurking around in
> there than anything else. Most of the examples of
> play, FREX, are gamist.
This is way OT. I am not a forgite, and others more knowledgable on such things will tell you that a lot of my assertions are either out of date or just plain wrong, however....
>
> If you've got the cash Rob, pick up a copy of "Dogs in
> the Vineyard" - if for no other reason that it's the
> best example of a narrativist game I've ever seen.
I have just got 'Sorcerer' by Ron Edwards. FWIW I don't intend to change the system, but if I can take into my game some of the techniques and insights into character generation that will improve my game, then thats great. Of course, not everyone has a challenging bunch to GM for. I have players who are unsuited to sim gaming as they look for the plot hook to either ignore it or to go off at a tangent from.
> And it's got superb mechanics as well: Widdles all
> over HQ with it's special cases and arithmetic heavy
> augments and the ilk.
Actually, I a big fan of Heroquest and its mechanics. One of my best gaming moments of all time came in a game GM'd by you at Continuum. When we saved all of our clan children who had been lost in previous Heroquests by convincing them that their blood family and clan were better than a bunch of evil scum sucking murderers who were trying to corrupt their immortal souls (the Lunars).
> [As a side note, on reflection I'm not surprised HQ is
> a narrativist system with gamist overtones as RQ was a
> simulationist system with gamist overtones 'cause the
> overtones were provided by the same person. "Our Greg"
> doesn't half like complicated mechanics built atop
> simple ones!]
No ones perfect, and he does make exceedingly good cakes, ahem, I mean games!! (sorry, thats a Brit joke Mr Kipling!)
Regards
Rob
Powered by hypermail