I spoke to Robin Laws at Dragonmeet. This is what he had to say
"I'd treat comparisons between super-powers exactly as before, as being on the same absolute scale. Superman and Spider-Man both have super speed. Superman simply has a lot more of it. Spider-Man's speed and Daredevil's would differ in that Spidey's is extraordinary and could do otherwise impossible things with it, where Daredevil's isn't and would be subject to normal human limitations. Daredevil may be fast, but can't outrun a horse without breaking credibility. Spidey conceivably could, though you might decide that would be credible for him do so while web-slinging but not on foot.
In a superhero genre pack you might create supporting text loosely quantifying what you get within certain mastery levels--how many masteries of super-fast you need to outrun a horse, a car, a jet, a warp-drive star ship, and so on. You could might even find it desirable to draw in the various quantifications we've been given in various Marvel or DC handbooks over the years, if you feel your game would benefit from following them. Of course these are often ignored for dramatic purposes by comic book writers."
Cheers
M
-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of L C
Sent: 28 November 2009 06:27
To: HeroQuest-RPG_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Re: SuperHeroQuest
Matthew Cole wrote:
>
>
> If I'm honest, I think you are lucky if you have players that all agree on
> issues like this. In my experience, it's a particularly hot potato
> (pass it
> on, pass it on!).
>
Heh.
I'm thinking specifically of my Unfettered Space players. If I do amass
another group here in Mtl, I think it would be more of an issue.
In some ways, it is something I would rarely expect to see outside of a
Superhero game that is designed to mimic something like the Avengers or
Justice League.
Most would be constructed to have everything more or less in the same
power range.
The "infinite scale" of HQ is less necessary in some ways now, because of the lack of objective scales. (It still provides for the interesting dice odds as advantages and mods stack, however.)
And my players would be good with it after a sit down and this kind of discussion. As long as they could be assured their ability wouldn't become redundant and useless, they would be alright. Which is, when you think about it, probably proof that this boils down to niche protection.
>
> I really don't know of anywhere in the HQ2 book that discusses PvP. It
> doesn't seem to be something that is considered fitting, from where I'm
> sitting. I will see if I can ask about it at Dragonmeet later today.
>
There's the arm-wrestling example on page 51, but that's about it. Mind you, in a number of cases, the descriptive examples use specific abilities with numbers for the antagonists, rather than resistances derived from other circumstances, which seems to imply a PvP concept.
Absolutely, if you can ask a designer about it, that would be great.
Ultimately, if HQ2 can't handle player v player conflict, it is going to
be a serious problem for me.
>
>
> If I had to do it, though, I'd probably think along the lines you are.
> Gotta
> say that, from what I've read of your posts on here and our live chat (!)
> that I was surprised to be thinking you'd gone all trad.
>
*smile* Nah. I'm far closer to wanting more trad in my desire for more
tactical possibilities in extended contests. (I mostly handle that with
generous use of situational modifiers)
I do sometimes miss bidding, though, and let my thoughts turn idly to a
way of marrying the two systems.
> I did reply while
> pretty tired - I hope that, less fatigued, I'd use my own credibility
> check
> another time.
>
Hah. No offense was taken, and if I sounded snippy at all in my
response, chalk that up to fatigue or lack of proper compensation for
online affect on my part.
> Have a better one, mate
>
> M
>
You too.
Yahoo! Groups Links
Powered by hypermail