jrutila

On 5/19/2019 at 3:49 AM, Archivist said:

Why should a player ' use anything other than their highest rated attribute? I understand if you have a keyward /attribute thatgives you a specific supernatural power that isn't your highest rated then that makes sense, but otherwise you would always just use the highest.

It is also quite boring if the character's only action is their "main" action. Think of a TV episode. We want to find different aspects of the main characters. This is why the GM defines the resistance after the player selects the ability to use. This way (as with the penalties and such) the GM can control the up/down beats even if the players use their lower abilities by adjusting the resistance.

This way you can encourage players to use their minor abilities. One exception, though. In the final climactic extended contest you could tell the resistance first and let the players then gather up their main abilities with augments and benefits to build up the tension.

The beauty of HQ is that you can play without different setting rulings and modifications. On the other hand you can add them but I would start with vanilla. Do you have the HQ2 core rules (instead of HQ Glorantha)?

1 hour ago, Aprewett said:

So I could go with the idea that even with a player defeat, I can still rule it’s a victory but just not the sort of outcome the players may have had at the start. Maybe some important gear is damaged in the melee etc. Need to come up with interesting complications.

This is called the Costly Success (p. 108). In normal contest the players should not get what they were looking for. For example:

You try to kill the ghoul. In victory you kill it, in defeat you don't. If there is no interesting story branches behind the ghoul surviving, you can rule costly success and that the ghoul dies in the defeat but the magic sword they were using to kill it is now broken (lingering penalty etc).

Don't use the costly success on extended contests, though. If they are EC'ing about the ghoul the stakes should be high enough that failure (ghoul not dying) is an interesting story branch.

In King of Dragon Pass (the computer game) there are couple of quite nice art pieces about doing a heroquest and how it shows in the Middle World. For examples, look at these pages and the pictures there:

https://kingofdragonpass.fandom.com/wiki/Uralda's_Blessing

https://kingofdragonpass.fandom.com/wiki/Orlanth_and_Aroka

20 hours ago, Aprewett said:

My confusion came from page 58 of HQG that states the GM also Frames the outcome - secretly. I have seen other advise by veterans of the system that does not match the as written rules. Which is fine but leads to confusion when you read threads that don’t match the text.

Good catch! Haven't read the rules for a while and it indeed says this ("The Game Master then secretly makes the same determination for the opposition, if any"). On the other hand, starting on page 64 (Consequences), the rule book does not say anything about the opposition (GM) getting what it wants. That statement (on page 58) sounds quite HQ1-ish. I would be ready to guess it is some kind of blast from the past there. And, of course, GM thinking about what the opposition wants and its tactics might help roleplay the contest. But the goal of the opposition is not present in the final consequences of the contest.

There has been the discussion about official HQ errata but I hope we don't go there in this thread.

@Ian Cooper might tell us if this wording is changed in the SRD?

3 hours ago, lordabdul said:

So unless I have it completely wrong (which is possible, I'm a Glorantha n00b), I'd rather "hero-questing" be just a set of GM recommendations and tips about how to incorporate a little, a lot, or a whole bunch of mythology into the adventures (themes, archetypal roles, historical journeys, etc.) rather than a special type of adventure.

Heroquesting is an in-world term. You can think of three "levels" of heroquesting. First, re-enacting myths in the Middle World (the "Real World") and acting like the gods without mainly concentrating on the myth. Second, re-enacting certain myths in the Middle World (little bit passing to the Hero Plane, maybe) and trying to gain some kind of religious contact. Third, doing the full-blown heroquest going into the Hero Plane and having all the risks and prizes.

And these reflect to the rpg scenarios about them. In the first case, the GM might build a story based on some known myth taking inspiration from it. But the story is not about the myth, per se. In the second case, the PCs kind of know they are revolving around a myth known in the world. The myth is in the story but they are not heroquesting it. In the third, the PCs are doing actual heroquest to get some advance for themselves or the clan. The story the GM and the players tell is the myth that the heroquest bases on, with some twists and surprises, of course.

You can run any of these with HQ easily. I don't know if I caught your question fully here.

On 4/28/2019 at 5:43 PM, Ian Cooper said:

An extended contest is when you want to break it down into tasks i.e. pick the lock, sneak pas the guards. We break down when tension is high, and the PCs have lots of possible, not just one repetitive action, to complete.

This is an idea that I also use but it brings up one problem: what if the player rolls a Complete Victory on the first roll? The PC is picking the lock and all of sudden the whole stealing of the princess' necklace is solved. Okay, it is a rare situation and you can come up with all the nice ideas of how the door leads PC directly to the closet with the necklace there ready for grabs or something. But in a sense, there is always the possibility that the player can pass the contest in one or two rolls and skips the rest of the tasks. And the tasks here are the things that bring tension to the contest.

@David Scott how about the boosting of only victory as the RAW says? How about bumping single rolls?

"A boost assures a clearer victory, should they prevail."

Does this mean that boost only boosts the collective victory and cannot bring the group up from a defeat?

Can you still bump up with a HP single rolls in Group Simple Contests?

As I now read the rules again there is nothing preventing bumping single roll in GSC. It seems that a boost is meant for getting something else out of GSC than marginal victories.

2 minutes ago, Ian Cooper said:

I really should come back to Ropecon and run some games there.

Please do! This year's theme is none other than ... mythology! You can say that Kalikos was quite excited about the theme...

3 hours ago, Ian Cooper said:

The **best** thing that you can do to support the line is get out there and play. On-line, in clubs, and at conventions.

We are doing our share here in Finland (which, as we know, is one of the big ones when it comes to Glorantha). When it comes to Glorantha games in Ropecon, Finland's biggest roleplaying con, HQ is taking precedence over RQ. During the three years I have now visited Ropecon there has been, yearly, one RQ (old ed.) event against four to six HQ events. In Kalikos (Finnish Glorantha society) meetings I have sensed that RQ is the nice memory from the past (everyone has played RQ in their youth) and Glorantha is explored through HQG.

It might be as @Ian Cooper says that RQ is the gateway drug. I for myself have thought about getting my RQ boots from the closet and run a game of the new shiny RQG. But selling that gateway drug is hard as I am so high on the easiness of sweet HQ gamemastering.

About the visibility of HQ, at Reddit's /r/rpg group I try to always mention "HeroQuest (by Robin D. Laws, not the board game!)" (oh, I hate that I have to make this correction beforehand every time) if someone asks system preferences or something about your favorite system. I have also sent a couple of topics to RPG podcasts about HQ.

On 4/26/2019 at 9:35 PM, Rick Meints said:

The best we can do economically is to publish RQ books (mostly) and provide HQ stats for them in a separate document.

What are these HQ stats? Isn't the beauty of HQ that you don't need any stats? Any material book should work with HQ. So, in that sense publishing RQ books also makes sense (as HQ GMs can use them too) even though the RQ stats eat valuable space from the books 😉.

If we follow strictly RAW you would have to buy the boost beforehand. I have never understood why it is this way. Also remember that the amount of points depends on number of PC participants. And, more RAW, you could only boost tie or victory, not failure. These both only on Group Simple Contests.

I think the example shows GM being a good GM and giving players the possibility to change away from the tie.

Now, reading more of the rules, I am not entirely sure if the rules forbid bumping the single roll on Group Simple contest. Only the example says that.

 

 

 

2

On 4/16/2019 at 2:17 PM, Aprewett said:

My ghoul wants the same outcome as them, to kill them and in its case eat them. So if it wins by just the least victory level it gets that outcome also? But I remember reading advice that this is not how you do it, instead you assign the consequence of defeat level - hurt etc to them. I just can’t see how to use the Extended Contest in a physical conflict. Other contests I can see working.

To emphasize more on what @soltakss wrote above. In a sense, it does not matter what the Ghoul wants from the contest (the Ghoul does not have its prize). I think they say that in RQ "the Monsters get experience rolls too". In HQ it is always all about the player characters, not the NPCs. If the PCs fail they don't get what they want and then some more consequences. The Ghoul does not get the PCs killed in Marginal Defeat.

2 hours ago, Aprewett said:

In the end only one player left standing and if I did it correct with the point score difference between him and the monster the monster only came out with a Hurt condition. The Frame was to defeat the thing, so now I am really confused as to how/when/why to use a EC. Probably operator error, but much confusion. What is the point of the 'Frame the outcome' if the system then gives a different result.

In HQ you always look at the contest from the PCs point of view. The monster did not actually get Hurt condition, the players got a Marginal Victory. So, if the frame was to defeat the monster they got it. The monster was defeated. But as it was Marginal the players might've done it so that they don't get some other advance. For example, if they were to bring the monsters head as a trophy they smashed the thing so badly that the head is no use. Also, depending on the type of the EC (Rising Action / Climactic) the PCs might be Hurt or Injured etc.

This was one major thing for me to grok in the system: If the opponent is defeated (in EC), read the whole success level of the contest from the opponent's defeat level. 

Some pointers about trying to convert your players to the HQ narrative way of playing Extended Contests.

Why would the players want the Extended Contest to go faster? It is the final climax and ends the session or story arc to the nail-biting finale. If your players are saying it goes too fast are you using it in "correct" places? Every fight does not deserve EC. Only the last big and important one.

This goes on to my next point of making EC longer. Yes, you should really spend some time on the EC. There are a couple of tricks to train your players to appreciate the EC. Set up the EC as normal. Define what would (about) the goal of the contest be. Then, for every round, don't ask what the player does (they don't get to tell you that they hide behind the table, for example). Instead, ask what ability do they now use. That choice will have the implication in it ("I will use my Weaponthane ability" vs "I will use my Earth Rune"). Later, when they grok the system, they can add more try-to into it. Now, you roll the dice. Resolution Points are not just some hitpoints you try to deal against the (abstract) opponents. They are fuel for the imagination. Be excited about the result and demand content from the player in exchange for the RP's. "Three RP's against you! What on earth happened? How did you fail?" Use physical RP's, hand them to the player and let the player tell, RP by RP, what happens in the situation. Savior every RP, if possible.

This way you are increasing the roleplaying during the EC. And that's, I assume, is what you have come to do around the table. So, even if the EC takes longer it is not away from the roleplaying and action. The beauty of HQ is that, with RPs, the players get to do all kinds of cool things (hide behind a table, swing with the chandelier, summon the great goddess) but those actions do not change the math. They are roleplaying.

Extended Contest has some tactical options. Assist is one big that I remind players always. There are a nice risk factor and the possibility to make great saves. But for Assist, you should demand the roleplay, RP by RP. Of course, HP's are the big thing. Again, the use of HP must be roleplayed (my best example is from the HQ2, an all of the sudden car drives in front of the PC and takes the bullet). Last, if you like so, you can use augmenting. Players augmenting each other may increase rolling the dice, but add a little of tactics. Again, demand roleplay for the augment ("I enchanted his sword before the combat began and felt Humakt's strong presence in the sword").

Can I ask you how come new players already have two masteries? If your bade level would be low enough with new players, there is only one mastery to explain.

I would like to take my words back and acknowledge the success levels in HQ. They clearly have a meaning (although I think the rules don't have anything about this, they should).

This means also that I have just learned a new technique to enhance the narration when playing HeroQuest. Thanks!

2 hours ago, jajagappa said:

And no. The Fail vs. Fumble is an interesting case.  How I try to play that is that the hero did not succeed in achieving what they sought to do, but some other opportunity or approach presents itself.

But Failure vs. Fumble is a Minor Victory thus the character gets the goal of the contest. Maybe he just gets it while failing (and resistance fumbling). This way you can narrate the outcome (still, getting the goal) differently than, say, with Success vs Failure.

Example. The hero tries to sneak past the guard using ability "Like a Cat in the Shadows".

Failure vs Fumble. The hero starts sneaking behind the guard. The guard is leaning with his chair and picking his teeth. All of sudden the hero bumps a pot sending it crashing to the ground. Luckily the guard takes one too far lean with his chair and falls down. The guard thinks the pot broke because of him and the hero gets past the guard without suspicion.

Success vs Failure. This is a walk in the park for our hero. He sneaks past the guard that is more interested in the findings from his mouth than actually protecting the doorway.

I don't know anything about Fading Suns but you don't need to worry about the "missing ratings". HQ:G is just a special "genre pack" for HeroQuest Core Rules. The runes are keywords with breakouts. You can have the same amount of keywords (with same starting ratings) in your game.

In the end, you, the GM, will set the resistance values based on story needs. And you do them based on the ratings the characters have.

I think you are safe with HQ. The Core Rules (applicable to any setting) can be found here: https://www.chaosium.com/heroquest-pdf/

1 minute ago, Oracle said:

I think this view is way too much staying on the technical level. This is a narrative system! Yes, it is a tie, but I'm pretty sure for the narrative, the story, there would be quite a difference between a tie with both contestants on the Critical level and a tie on a Failure or even a tie with Fumbles.

That is a good point. This would give more umph to the outcome levels giving maybe more help for the narration.

Inspired by the thread about Simple Contest Result question.

The Crit-Success-Failure-Fumble scale is little odd and confusing in times in HQ. Rules-wise it doesn't really matter what level you get as long as you get tie (and high roll) or higher level. Except that the rules state that if both Fumble they might both get some negative consequence.

Do you others note the level the player rolled? Is it same thing to tie with successes than to tie with failures? Or win with Failure vs Fumble than win with Success vs Failure?

Should the level names be changed in future material (ping @Ian Cooper) to reduce confusion with players coming from traditional rpgs?

If you feel adventurous (pun intended) you could start from the Eleven Lights. It would require a little more reading from you (as the GM) but you don't need to read all of the two books (Coming Storm and 11L). Keep the characters thin at the beginning and introduce only the NPCs in the scenario. From page 38 in Eleven Lights you can find "The Missing" scenario. If you after that want to continue, you have rest of the book to do the campaign.

I feel I crocked the system best by reading HQG and HQ2 both kind of cross-referencing. Some things were said a little clearer in HQ2 and the HQG was the actual implementation of those rules, so to say.

1 minute ago, KingofElfland said:

I joined the forums and bought HQG on the strength of this episode. 

Welcome to the forums. It seems quiet at the moment but if you ask anything folks here are eager to help with HQ.

https://thegrognardfiles.com/2019/01/21/4567/

If you are interested in the history of the best roleplaying system out there...