Re: The merits of relative and absolute resistances (HQ1 and HQ2)

From: David Dunham <david_at_...>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:52:22 -0800


> > it's not reasonable to expect that the designers
> > of Gloranthan game supplements come up with numbers for everything - in
>This is an understandable reason. I just liked how HQ1 forced
>supplement writers to think about this. I also very much understand
>that it was a hard job trying to get the numbers right

Here's a secret: some HQ1 supplement writers realized that the system of numbers was broken and didn't try hard to get the numbers right, because it was impossible.


>DnD has no trouble producing supplements filled with numbers,
>but then it is a game about numbers.

D&D is an entirely different game. But you know, it too doesn't really support saying "Harrek is level 10." That would work great for my campaign, because everyone would be level 1 (as the campaign hasn't started yet). But in your long-running campaign, it would make him laughably weak.

>I still
>think the Pass/Fail thing is something of a red herring. I'm likely to
>ignore it like mad, and draw pacing from my own sense of my player's

This is exactly what the rules recommend.

>What do you do for Player v Player? Do you use the numbers on the sheet,
>or do you calculate resistance as "hard", "moderate", etc.

It almost never comes up in our games. But, why would a Narrator need to get involved? The numbers are there on the sheets. Use them.

BTW, another reason it's not a great idea to present absolute numbers: HeroQuest is a generic system. Not only would you have to deal with the question about whether Harrek could beat Black Hralf the Weasel, but whether he can beat Darth Vader or Cardinal Richelieu. After all, they're all pretty formidable story opposition. (Note to those who like this sort of discussion: you can have it without any numbers.)


David Dunham
Glorantha/HQ/RQ page:

Powered by hypermail