I can see the pros and cons on both sides.
While I understand the way HeroQuest is built and can be played there is absolutely no reason NOT to gear it out... at least from a system standpoint. If Heavy Blaster gives a +5 and Hold-Out gives a +2 (^5 and ^2 from Hero Wars) the system is not going to break. It will balance out in play. It has the real drawback in painting the narrator into a corner by their own gear. By, system wise, no real issue.
That being said, Hero Wars is not HeroQuest no matter how much they have the same father. Each has its own feel. HQ is a pure story system and HW is a midpoint between HQ and RQ. Of the 3 I like RQ a little better than HQ, and HQ better then HW. But, I did not get into HQ because it could do what RQ does just like RQ... that would be a waste of time. I got into it to use a storytelling system that worked! LOL
As for breaking in my players, I am tempted to tell them I am going to introduce them to the system with a silly game set in Star Wars. A Mangy Wookie with a lisp, a little girl who beats her Ewok doll to relieve her frustration, a Babysitting Droid with a bent optical receptor (farsighted) and an out of work slacker-janitor with a fetish for hentai. None of them have traditional skills, just abilities like "Scratch Flees", "Flip to my favorite page" and "Naughty Ewok!"
Once they are ready to play a purely silly game I start it and after a little bit of game play they start getting pelted with small bits of debris. Upon investigating (they will, I know them) they will be in the middle of Ani Skywalker's destruction of the Temple. They will have to use the "BS" skills to get things done and live through the problems of the rise of the Empire.
I figure once they use "Mommy said you can't!" to stop a Clone Trooper attack they will be in love with the system. The sand-box nature of self-naming abilities and the "how do you use it?" will sell them very fast. Besides, it is a dark and funny setting to start the game with. They will probably not want to go to a "more serious" setting with the rules.
Bo
On 11/30/2011 1:08 PM, Aaron Stockser wrote:
> I am sincerely hoping that you aren't implying that I am against
> character-driven dilemma or free player choice.
>
> I was responding to a specific situation in a specific campaign
> (Traditionalist/Gear-focused gamers being exposed for the first time to
> narrative-focused RP in a Star Wars campaign).
>
> Pissing off your players by having them discover over the course of play
> that their Abilities don't work the way they expected and in fact are
> causing them problems isn't a great way to "sell"
> HeroQuest/Narrative-Focused RP to a new group.
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:47 PM, orlanthumathi
> <anti.spam_at_...>wrote:
>
>
>> **
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Another way to drive the point home is to ask any player who writes
>>>
>> *Heavy
>>
>>> Blaster* or *Holdout Blaster* on their character sheet why it's there and
>>>
>>
>>> what it represents to them. If they say "Well of course I need a blaster
>>>
>> to
>>
>>> fight!" remind them that they don't need *Blaster* on their character
>>>
>> sheet
>>
>>
>>> to own or use one.
>>>
>> To play devils advocate here, there is another way to think about this.
>> You can take a leaf out of Dogs in the Vinyard and allow weapon based
>> abilities to be as available as the player could possibly wish. After all,
>> they are bound to get the players into trouble. Of course this works best
>> with a play style that emphasises moral uncertainty, character driven
>> dilemma, and free player choice.
>>
>> Jamie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Powered by hypermail