'Campaign packs' can have a range of NPC power levels, and thus levels of operation, within them. So a Heortling pack can talk about stealing sheep, but also talk about engaging in political power plays with Kallyr. So, a ref. can introduce his PCs to this environment, and if they are tough as nails they may be dining with King Broyan, but if they a plebs they may just be in the Fyrd being inspired from a distance.
Scenarios - if you want them to be pick-up-and-play scenarios - have to be pitched as specific power/influence levels.
HQ doesn't have the 'advantage' of obvious and clear scale-ability that e.g. AD&D and Champions (Hero System) has, when developing a scenario. These systems clearly state 'this scenario is for level X or points-base Y characters'.
As a writer, you know that a Champions scenario for 450 point-based characters, with Combat values between 10 and 14, means your PCs will be pitched against adversaries at a particular level. If you are a ref. and that's where your PCs are at, you can buy and use the book with only minor adjustment. In HQ, because of different house rules on augmenting, a PC with 2 masteries in his main fighting ability in one campaign under one set of augmenting rules, may be noticably less potent than in the next campaign with another set of rules. HQ has the advantage of encouraging a lot of house-ruling around this stuff. That is also a disadvantage.
I perceive, rightly or wrongly, HQ as a cult-game, not a mainstream pick-up-and-play game. I, in all game systems, have used scenarios to cover my lazy periods, and want to 'pick up and play' quite often. I use campaign packs when I want to tailor things to the PCs, but only when I have the time avaiable to think about 'fit' and tailoring things.
I have the sense that there haven't been that many scenarios created, because there isn't really the demand for them. HQ referees want endless background, not pick-and-play.
I used to love the structure that TSR brought to the Forgotten Realms AD&D environment, because the scenarios were available at a host of different power levels, but the campaign packs covered the whole spectrum, and the two dovetailed nicely. I don't *really* see this approach in HQ, but that's partly because the publishing process appears to be hideously slow.
Hope this helps!
Nam
> That is, in fact, precisely my objection to the scene-based form of
scenario. How can it be about the PCs if it assumes what they're doing
and why? One size fits all PCs?
> I think that any pre-written scenario is doomed somewhat to this
problem, no matter the style. If you really, really want to make play
about the PCs, then the scenario should be written up from the PCs. In
fact, skip scenarii altogether, and just make and modify the situation
based on what happens in play, is my usual technique.
Powered by hypermail