On March 21, 2007 12:00 am, cornponk wrote:
> Looking forward to Questworlds coming out. One thing that got me
> thinking was the comment by Robin that he will be `scraping the sim
> aspects' from the game. I've also read posts by HQ gamers that they
> play HQ in a gamist way (can't find them now).
I missed that quote. I'm not even sure what he means by that, although it sounds like an excuse to restart the endless "Scale" debate, so it is probably best left alone. :-)
> This got me thinking, "Can Heroquest do gamism?"
>
> I'm sure this will disturb the minds of the narrativist purists, and
> rightly so, the author himself has put an overt narrative bent on it.
> I think I'm a gamist at heart but I can't get away from the simplicity
> and effectiveness of the HQ system.
I understand that.
> Obviously when you think about it, it becomes a very different game.
> Gamism needs restrictions and balance. The chargen would have to be a
> lot stricter for example, there might be stricter limits on the number
> and types of augments, and very set keywords and abilities etc.
I think chargen and advancement remains one of the most perplexing parts of the game in that there are either too few rules or too many. :) I know people who play with no use of HP for advancement, some who play with modified rules, etc. It seems to be a point where lots of people snag, partly because the game is set up in a way where it often seems unimportant for how one wants to use the system.
> But the questions still remains; is it possible? How would you go
> about it? Or why bother?
Personally, I am more of a why bother person on this. But I can see the appeal.
LC
Powered by hypermail