I have often wondered if it would be better to go back to rolling augments. My group are not keen on this as they seem to like searching for skills, but I quite liked the old method, it didn't seem broken at the time. Everyone grabbed the HQ system because it allowed more augments more often and some players on these lists seemed to dislike rolling.
It is interesting looking back, switching to the old system as written would have a number of potential effects, some good some bad.
Looking back we had far more extended contests in HW, (which I liked as it was compatible with my approach to narration), augmenting actually took less time than it does now, was restricted to a stage in the Extended Contest and tended to inform AP bids. Contests were a slow build-up of augments which worked well with simple goals, without shifts of skills, but tended to encourage less variety within the contest as a greater investment was placed in the skill augmented.
Rolling augments wasn't a big thing for us, we got other players to oppose our augment rolls while the GM was focusing on other players, then narrated them as part of the bidding process. More complex augments (double benefits etc.) became emphasised in the narrative. The removal of the double bonus in HQ killed off rolling for them, it never seemed worth it.
Has anyone actually turned back the clock and tried things the old way?
Powered by hypermail