Re: Ho Much Rule fiddling Is Tolerable?

From: Simon Phipp <soltakss_at_WFLkZvARy-jeOKfAVcAWjY4HkNBT_Lz0x-kvJhDVbTrkRRCUgyOxlvyVDUHhuh4BB72>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:34:32 -0000


Dan Guillou:
>

> Personally I would like more specific magic rules.
> I remember an example where practitioners of three different magic
> systems tried to move a big rock. The GM was supposed to give
> completely different vivid descriptions of what their magical
efforts
> felt like. But they used the exact same rule mechanics.
> Boring.

HeroQuest is a very simple system at heart. You have abilities that are very flexible and a simple method of resolving contests.

I'd prefer magic to be as simple. However, the current implementation in terms of Glorantha has added layer upon layer of complexity and turned a very simple idea into a complex beast of a game.

In my opinion, you can simplify HeroQuest a lot and still get a fast game with a lot of flavour.

So, please, fewer magic systems and exemptions, keep everything simple and it will rock along quite nicely.

> So, my vote is for greater differentiation, even if it means
having to
> fiddle a bit more with the bits.

I'm the opposite and want simpler, less fiddly rules.

Use abilities/feats dynamically in play. If you have Run Up Walls and want to climb a wall, then use it. If you want to avoid a swordsman's attack with Dance Past Blades, then use that as a primary ability and augment with similar things. Easy-peasy.

> So pretty near the top of my wishlist in a new edition, is a bunch
of
> extensive examples of what specific feats or spells can do, in
detail.

They can do what you want them to do. Seriously, if you have Dance Past Blades, then this can be used to counter a sword attack, to dodge thrown daggers, to avoid a scything chariot, to get past a swinging blade trap and to do a nifty sword-dance to impress the ladies.

Don't try and tie down feats or abilities, be inventive and use them creatively. It's far more fun that way.

> Just to give an idea what can happen when you leave
> straight-augment-land.

Personally, I prefer straight augments as I like one roll per contest. Why should I roll for several augments first, then roll for the contest? It slows things down, it's complicated and it doesn't add much to the game. But, I'm getting rulesy.

> PS Players who won't study for their rpg-sessions... why should
they
> play in Glorantha?

In our group of 4, we have a GM, who should study, someone who knows a lot about Glorantha, someone who used to know a lot about Glorantha and still knows a fair amount and someone who knows very little about most of Glorantha, despite having played for 5 or 6 years in Glorantha.

All of them get a lot out of the games, both HQ and RQ, and the lack of Gloranthan knowledge or interest is not really a hindrance.

The only requirement to play in Glorantha is that the player should want to have fun.

> PSS The thing about playing a low-lvl game in Glorantha, is that
some
> of us have been doing those for almost 20 years. Because, IMO that
was
> pretty much the only thing the RQ rules were really good at.

Flame On! Hang on, no, flame off again.

I'll just say that I beg to differ. I played in/GMed a high level campaign for several years and the RQ rules worked just fine.

See Ya

Simon            

Powered by hypermail