> In some ways, it boils down to which is more important to you as a
> narrator and to you as a player: The dice or the story?
It is the realism provided by the dice that the simulationists covet.
> But once upon a time, I remember making an endless succssion of RQ
> characters who just... well.. died. Amusingly at times, but died.
> Would have liked to have learnd more about heir stories. But that was
> long ago and gaming was much different then.
But it's really dangerous to resist oppression. Evading those tax-collectors isn't fun. Making the military governor a laughing stock may be but there are dangers involved in attacking that man. To me it is that feeling of beating the odds by ingeniousness, clever execution of a devious plot and feelings involved that makes the hero. Heracles is a prime example of a narrative type hero. He was damn tough and kicked everyones ass. Not very heroic in my book. I admit that narrative style doesn't always work like that, but there is a trend that favours the success (or a dignified loss)of the characters and their side.
RQ tries (or tried) to simulate the dangers of fighting with broos, scorpionmen and such, but simulationism doesn't mean that you are weaker than your opposition(which I guess what was the reason of many of your deaths), but it does mean that there are dangers related in armed conflict. What is beautifull in HW is that the rules, while bend towards narrative, doesn't rule realism or even simulationism (albeit with a large degree of abstraction) out. You can have the best of the both worlds if you wan't.
Olli Kantola
--
It's lovely to watch colorful shadows in the planets of the eternal light.
-The Master
Powered by hypermail