RE: Re: Hero Points

From: Jane Williams <janewilliams20_at_...>
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:44:55 +0100


> I apologize if this is compleatly heretical, but do you people really
> model your games after TV-shows and movies?

Personally, no. I try to model them after books.  

> Many people seem to have issues about HQ having very fast character
> development. This is not a problem with HQ alone, but with most
> roleplaying systems in general.
>
> Actually the only exception I know is Hârnmaster (a d100 system,
> somewhat like RQ), where you get a _chanse_ to advance 1% in a skill
> when you roll a critical success using it. Slow and feels realistic.
>
> The secret why Hârnmaster works is that the craracters start out quite
> competent in their fields.

Yes, I think this is the basic problem. A lot of RPGS advertise themselves as "you, too can be a hero!", then hand you a character generation system that produces incompetent wimps. So the player need for character development is more like "so how long before I can have the character I wanted in the first place?"

HQ has particular problems between expectation and result here, partly because it calls the PCs "heros" when they're nothing of the sort, and partly because it was sold as being an improvement on RQ in being aimed at higher-level games. Only the setting, rather than the system, isn't. Aimed at higher-level games, that is - an improvement on RQ, yes.

Fortunately the rules are flexible enough that once you've sorted out a scale of how good different target levels are, and to what extent that includes augments, you can just scrap the entire character development system and enjoy yourselves. Which is what we're trying out in "Swords" at the moment. We know roughly how good we are compared with clan champions and so on, narratively, so we wrote down some numbers that fitted that. One of my favourite player quotes as we went through rejigging numbers : "with Jane's insane 'I trust you' policy Landros might actually get to be as good looking as I originally wanted him to be". And yes, he did. "Good Looks 5w2". Why not? If that's what the player wants, why should the rules stop them?

Character development (when we get around to it), will be along the same lines. "I reckon I should have this new relationship as a result of all that, what do you think, about 10W on my side, maybe 14 on his?" Forget spending HP on improvement. If you want to "improve", you justify it narratively/dramatically. If we have a year's game-time gap, we'll recalibrate to set things to the level we think we ought to be by then.

I would not try this with an unknown group, or a bunch of mini-maxers. As quoted above, this is the "I trust you" policy, and it only works on that basis. At least, I hope it works... We'll see.

Powered by hypermail