Re: Re: Keywords only, or additional list of abilities?

From: Roderick and Ellen Robertson <rjremr_at_...>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:33:58 -0800

I'm a reactionary, too (in a different way - I like Objective, rather than Subjective, ability ratings for my world, and I think Flaws are totally useless as a separate ability "type", as just two of my disagreements with the HQ2 rules. (On the other hand, I've got *other* disagreements with HQ1, HW, RQ1-2, RQ3, the old RQ4 beta, MRQ, Pendragon, Pendragon Pass, etc. etc. etc.)). Hang in there brother! Power to the People! No-one can make us play anything!

RR
He was born with the gift of laughter and the sense that the world was mad R. Sabatini, Scaramouche

> Even with a big screaming announcement I suspect it's quite likely. To
> be honest, I'd do it announcement or no, because I *like* having the
> list. Which probably makes me reactionary or something, but I couldn't
> care less. I don't want a GM forcing me to play a game in a way I feel
> uncomfortable with, and I sure as heck don't want to GM a game in way I
> feel uncomfortable with. But I realise many don't feel the same, and
> that's fine by me. YMMV, and all that.