Oh, indeed. Unlike my one real experience of playing (as opposed to GMing) RQ back c1990, the PCs don't have to worry about whether the trollkin with the sling has a buddy hiding behind that rock to help him wipe you out when you close to melee range. And you don't have the problem of always failing to make that skill increase roll.
RQ may have been bright and innovative 25 years ago, but was starting to show its age even by 1990.
> As was said in the last HQD, this is a game for
> heroes. That, at heart, may end up being the crux of
> it. Does our group want to play heroes?
As has been said, at least this system gives the option (if one takes hero in the sense of something like Herakles or Perseus), but without resorting to the excesses of other, more popular, systems. In fact, HQ's long awaited arrival is what has tempted me back into the active RPG hobby after nearly a decade spent on the sidelines, deep in burn out.
What I'm looking forward to is being able to challenge the PCs in ways that few other systems really allow, poor little ex-D&D players as most of them are. e.g. Hey, Mr. Orlanthi Hunter - you do realise your god the Great Bear was actually enlightened by the Red Moon when she rode on his back during her Godquest --- but the priests have been keeping the truth from you, don't you? (Mwahhahahahaha!)
Other campaigns might have featured PCs having crises of faith, but that would have been roleplaying as much in spite of the system being used, rather than with its support. Here the system permits, nay encourages, threats other than the tediously physical ones of violence that are the heritage of this hobby. And a trivial combat can be over in one pair of D20 rolls - no worrying about the players getting into a fight after 9pm when the next day is a working day, and having no prospect of bed before midnight.
Powered by hypermail