Jump to content

Tartarosso

Regulars
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About Tartarosso

  • Rank
    Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    D&D, Dylan Dog rpg, cyberpunk 2020, gurps, primetime adventures, archipelago II, esoterrorists, heroquest, the pool, shock: social science fiction
  • Current games
    The Pool
  • Blurb
    King time player

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Any anticipation on non-glorantha qw?
  2. Mmmh... so if I understand correctly from your note, do we have to wait an updated excel sheet to have actually valid general evaluations? Or are the general conclusions you came to still valid? Unfortunately I don't have the time to make an excel file or to check the results on any dice right now.< Otherwise I would do it on my own.
  3. @Nevermet A question about setting the difficulty in the tests. It is a problem that I have also encountered in HeroQuest in the past. When you say "I realized I wasn't adjusting the base based on prior rolls" do you mean you didn't use the pass fail cycle of the manual? How did you determine the level of difficulty in general for the individual tests?
  4. Especially if you have been coming for years of traditional RPGs, it is a bit difficult to get used to not having to roll for every action. However usually after a while I think you get used to it. I can not bring my experience because, despite my age, many of my peers started with the red box or with the advanced d&d 1st edition, for a series of cases in life I "re-started" to play late and so I played more time non-traditional games than traditional games. One piece of advice I would like to give, even if as I said I haven't tried it on the field, is that the players has to act as if they were in a story or a movie. But not so much in the sense that they must have a directorial attitude (and therefore make their character do the most interesting thing even if it conflicts with what the character wants) but rather to think that since they are the protagonists of the story (strong or weak protagonists, it doesn't matter ) we are not interested in seeing them do things of little value, like climbing a wall (unless the wall is very important in the plot, of course). That wall is either climbed or NOT climbed but all automatically. Instead we are interested to see what the hell happens in the fundamental moments when they organize the concert, when they play at the concert, when they will fight with some NPCs for the resources necessary for the concert itself. It doesn't matter if they know how to tune their instrument (unless this is one of a character's flaws, in which case it was the player himself who said being created to tell you "I want this disadvantage to be in the spotlight!" ). Ah only compliments for the fact that you are playing a story with practically no fighting. It is precisely in a situation like this that Hero Quest shines and shows how it exalts situations in which one does not fight by integrating the mechanics with the free flow of roleplaying. In many other games you should either do all this part without mechanics (because they are oriented almost only to body-to-body combat) then do everything in free form (which can also be fun but, I personally prefer to be supported by mechanics if I need it) or even ignore the mechanics because they get in the ways.
  5. To me actual plays are very very welcome! Instead I lament (is it correct in english to use lament in this case?) the lack of actual plays nowadays. And moreover of true actual plays. Often there are no reference to the rules. And remembering the times of storygames and "the forge" forums I have to underline that an actual play has not to be a very long text describing the whole session but it should usually be a report of the salient moments of play (but it can also be an almost complete trascription of the whole game if you have time and the will. So seeing more actual plays of one of my favorite game makes only me happier
  6. Thanks. When I have some times (weeks could pass ) I'll post some opinions about the topic and your blog post.
  7. Hello, reading the srd of Quest Worlds I got some questions. In particular I am interested in chained contests. 1) Is the degree of victory decided by the last simple contest of the chain? 2) When both sides have the same result (critical vs critical, success vs success ....) the text says "Worse roll is hurt. If tied, no effect ". So the part with the worst result is already in the hurt condition, does nothing change? 3) In the event that the chained contest ends with the complete defeat of one of the two contenders (no one disengages), the loser will necessarily be in a "dying" condition. Does this necessarily imply that he is out of the game? Can the degree of victory not be limited to just the prize (the goal)? Has it to necessarily concern also the character, which as the text says "If you are dying you will, without rapid and appropriate intervention, expire" (obviously also applies to social conflicts as we know)
  8. Well, for this situations I have another house rule (yes probably I have too many house rules) similar to what says @soltakss . Obviously it's a good house rule for the kind of play I aim to. I want to make the playing characters (the protagonists) to explore some themes and to have an interesting adventure (like in novels). So having a protagonist dying at random (in the worst case) but also in an important but no climatic scene it's something negative to me. The house rule I introduced is that the life of the protagonists can be the price for a conflict only if they agree. When the life of the protagonists is not involved I frame the outcome of the adversaries as the handbook suggests. Yes the threat of death is not always present but there are so many other things that can go wrong in the outcome of a conflict that the story is always interesting. And in years I use this rules in many rpgs with a contest resolution similar to Heroquest, I have been always happy with this solution.
  9. Hello @Telen666gard probably you are right. Anyway I find the expression Confusing to me. Moreover an old topic in which Laws answered directly, confused me more because I didn't remembered it well. In fact the topic was about a particular situation. Here the link to Laws answer https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/heroquest-hacking-each-other-to-bits.464819/page-5 It was about a conflict between the conflict goal and the consequence chart. On this topic, In my games, when someone is trying to kill someone else I use a different approach. I distinguish between protagonists, main Npcs, and minor Npcs, mooks. But I'm from mobile and I can't describe it well. With the one in my previous post, I've now described all the house rules I use. For the rest I play raw. I have to say I find more clear the phrasing yes/yes but/etc. Here a topic in which @Ian Cooper Proposed it. Excuse me for the poor formatting.
  10. I think that the rules as intended by the author Robin d laws, are that you don't obtain the price of the contest unless you have a major victory. And this is stated in other threads here on BRP Central an from the same words of Laws on rpg.net. If I interpreted the words correctly (I'm not a native English speaker). Now I'm writing from mobile phone so it is difficult to link those threads. That said, in my games I use the "no but, no, yes, yes but etc." result table. And for making the extended contests intersting, I use a personal reworked version of the chained contest rule. Being from mobile I can't describe it in details, anyway at every turn I use a lot the lesson from apocalypse world: fictional positioning and using the result of the single contest to create intersting situations.
×
×
  • Create New...