Re: Ho Much Rule fiddling Is Tolerable?

From: David Dunham <david_at_PDaIyxi82zfrpSCu6mc18dgKFXkFjtox93UYlIabnk3htua8Y5iAQqpjunUgmso3xSSiWX>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:02:41 -0700


Peter

>I think it a retrograde step to deny distinctions in a rule sense.

In one way of looking at it, having the distinction is a retrograde step. The original Hero Wars draft made almost no distinction between the types of magic. The published version tried to make them more different, going back to the way it was in RuneQuest.

I could argue either side. I think it's to some degree a matter of taste whether you think that the specifics of magic use is unimportant in a narrative game (the important thing being whether or not your use of magic advances your goals), or want to emphasize how Gloranthan magic is different from other fictional magic by lavishing them with rules detail.

Of course, it's really not sides but a continuum. For example, one could keep differences in the three magic systems, but drop the rules for concentration (even if this is what a few Gloranthan specialists do).

I think some unintended consequences of the rules as written have made them simulate Glorantha suboptimally (e.g. it's better in game terms to concentrate so you get cheaper magic), so simpler, less detailed rules may portray Glorantha better in actual play. However, overly simple magic rules may not portray Glorantha as well in print. And without this background knowledge, players might not simulate Glorantha accurately in actual play.

As for the subject line: if the new generic HeroQuest rules are sufficiently streamlined, flexible, and fun, would people be happy leaving Gloranthan magic without specific rules? NO fiddly bits?

-- 

David Dunham
Glorantha/HQ/RQ page: www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html

           

Powered by hypermail