Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
smjn

On Hero Wars, HeroQuest 1&2, RuneQuest and Glorantha

Recommended Posts

I was wondering if it was Avalon Hill or Games Workshop. Is there a difference between those two?

I think both have the same content, except GW version is missing the Glorantha material. Art is different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relative not absolute skills? What do you mean by this?

I think he means that the resistance levels are set by to the skill level of the heroes, whereas in HQ1 the resistance to pray for a miracle directly from (the Invisible) God is always 10m9, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he means that the resistance levels are set by to the skill level of the heroes, whereas in HQ1 the resistance to pray for a miracle directly from (the Invisible) God is always 10m9, for example.

Got it. It's pretty much using the pass/fail cycle.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so much set by the skill level of the heroes, but based upon the story need vs. the skill level of the heroes. So a similar action later in a campaign will probably have a higher resistance because the adventurers abilities have increased.

SDLeary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm interested in why you like HQ1 vs. HQ2. I've just finished reading HQ2 and am thinking of giving it a try. I've read some on HQ1 but couldn't get past the magic section.

The magic section in HQ1 was butchered to make it "realistic Glorantha", which made it quite complex.

I use Affinities as scores or augments, Feats to cause effects or augments, Wizardry to cause effects/augments, Animism to cause effects/augments and that's about it. I'd also use Mysticism in the same way. For all of them, if you have a relevant spell/feat/ability and a skill then you can use it to augment or to have an effect, no matter what is being used. I also don't differentiate between magic types in terms of power - so, common magic is as powerful as feats or wizardry.

I really don't like the idea behind HQ2 magic, for several reasons:

1. Using Runes as the basis of magic doesn't work for me, because Zorak Zoran's Death Magic is vastly different to Humakt's or Hunter's Death Magic.

2. Feats are too high level - sure, have HeroQuesting abilities, but call them something else and keep feats as powers

3. Deities are not differentiated enough for my tastes (I really liked the idea of each Deity having its own powers and abilities)

Relative not absolute skills? What do you mean by this?

In HQ1, if you have a skill of 10M then you know roughly what that means in the grand scheme of things. A Clan Chapion might have a M2 skill, a Tribal Champion an M3 skill, dragons might have M5 skills and so on. In HQ2, this seems to go out of the window and your skill seems to be roughly the same no matter if you are a farm boy just out of short trews or a superhero taking down dragons.

It is probably something that I don't understand properly.

I like the Pass/Fail cycle. What about it do you not like?

Again, I don't really understand it and haven't internalised it.

The same with lingering benefits.

Again, I don't really understand it and haven't internalised it. I have hold-over benefits from a good roll or action that last for a bit, which is probably the same kind of thing.

If you don't use extended contests, how do you keep dramatic events being dramatic?

Through the narration and through the action.

Mythic Russia uses Chained Contests, which are far easier to use than Extended Contests. So, in a complex situation, we break it down to a series of contests, each of which is augmented by the PCs and each of which has an effect on the whole contest. That is quick, easy, more exciting and saves messing about with APs, bids, changing tactics and so on.

It seems to me that Extended Contests in HQ1 were a way of bringing crunchy tactics back into a game that doesn't need crunchy tactics. It felt wrong to me, didn't play well in any of the games that I played in or Narrated and just bogged the game down too much.

Obviously, these are my opinions and shouldn't be treated as a critique of HQ1 or HQ2. Other people love Extended Contests and love HQ2 in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The magic section in HQ1 was butchered to make it "realistic Glorantha", which made it quite complex.

I use Affinities as scores or augments, Feats to cause effects or augments, Wizardry to cause effects/augments, Animism to cause effects/augments and that's about it. I'd also use Mysticism in the same way. For all of them, if you have a relevant spell/feat/ability and a skill then you can use it to augment or to have an effect, no matter what is being used. I also don't differentiate between magic types in terms of power - so, common magic is as powerful as feats or wizardry.

I really don't like the idea behind HQ2 magic, for several reasons:

1. Using Runes as the basis of magic doesn't work for me, because Zorak Zoran's Death Magic is vastly different to Humakt's or Hunter's Death Magic.

2. Feats are too high level - sure, have HeroQuesting abilities, but call them something else and keep feats as powers

3. Deities are not differentiated enough for my tastes (I really liked the idea of each Deity having its own powers and abilities)

I have trouble with using Runes as magic but for different reasons. I'm relatively new to Glorantha so I don't differences probaly as much as you do. What scares me is using your magical Rune as more of a catch-all for everything. I can see players doing that. I'm also an old-school gamer and I'm not used to story telling games. I like gritty combat, hit points, and magic spells. It's hard for me to think outside-the-box.

I'm at the Magic section of Mythic Russia now. I'm curious to see how it differs from HQ2.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Through the narration and through the action.

Mythic Russia uses Chained Contests, which are far easier to use than Extended Contests. So, in a complex situation, we break it down to a series of contests, each of which is augmented by the PCs and each of which has an effect on the whole contest. That is quick, easy, more exciting and saves messing about with APs, bids, changing tactics and so on.

It seems to me that Extended Contests in HQ1 were a way of bringing crunchy tactics back into a game that doesn't need crunchy tactics. It felt wrong to me, didn't play well in any of the games that I played in or Narrated and just bogged the game down too much.

Obviously, these are my opinions and shouldn't be treated as a critique of HQ1 or HQ2. Other people love Extended Contests and love HQ2 in general.

I just read the "chained contests" and I like it. I also read the extended contests with the point bid system. That reads really interesting. I wonder why it doesn't work well in your gaming sessions?

I know these are just your opinions but having only played one session of HQ2, it's nice to hear someones experience.

Thanks,

Mikuel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read the "chained contests" and I like it. I also read the extended contests with the point bid system. That reads really interesting. I wonder why it doesn't work well in your gaming sessions?

I don't know. Perhaps we weren't using them right, or we misunderstood them.

Our group played HQ for 3 or 4 years, including performing the Lightbringers Quest in Glorantha, and in that time we rarely used Extended Contests successfully, despite using 2 Narrators.

I know these are just your opinions but having only played one session of HQ2, it's nice to hear someones experience.

Other people have played a lot more HQ2 than I have, so they would have better ideas of how it plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×