Re: Re: Starships and Lifepods

From: Bo <lorgryt_at_...>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 08:14:10 -0800

On 12/8/2011 3:18 AM, Jeff wrote:
>
> Heya -
>
> > Two things on this one: First, I get that the issue I keep missing is
> > simulating a good book/movie/show not a real event. Roger that!
>
> That's not quite what I was trying to say (and my apologies if that is
> what came over).
>

No need top apologize. You weren't saying that exactly, but it is the best way for me to keep my head on strait with this system. You have to admit it is a departure not just from traditional game systems but from the kinds of thinking that go with it. I am reiterating the view to keep it clear.

> > And
> > second, and this one is a big one, why don't these really interesting
> > keywords end up on the list or a web page somewhere? I realize you came
> > up with these on-the-fly, but damn that would be useful to have list to
> > look over and get a feel for the concepts others have used! LOL
>
> FWIW, when I have players make characters for HeroQuest, I tell them
> to give me a short "Hollywood Pitch" about what their character is.
> "Give me the bare basics - what is this character in seven words or
> less?" And that becomes their occupational keyword.
>
> So we end up with lots of keywords like:
> Rubble Bandit
> Farmer turned Mercenary
> Best Woodsman in Talastar
> Rich Bastard Dilettante
> Murderous First Mate
> Seductive Snake-Dancing Priestess
> Remarkably Learned Scribe
>

Yes, but you have to admit, the approach given for the two Eastwood character's skills are a good example of the difference between HQ2e's abilities and the skills of more traditional games. You have no idea how the ability names open the door to the differences. It is very helpful for a neophyte to the system to have that kind of "permission" to be creative. Remember, I have a group coming from traditional one-skill-one-effect systems (I know that all systems skills can be interpreted more openly... just saying).

Bo