Mystics

[Seth L. Blumberg]

Valamir, you've captured exactly why I will probably never play Hero Wars. The organization of the rules is absolutely the worst I have ever seen in any printed product of any kind, including technical documentation written and edited by engineers for whom English is at best a third language.

[Ron Edwards]

Hey,

Unfortunately, Ralph, you've initiated one of the things I dislike most about discussing Hero Wars. I do understand where you're coming from, and to some extent I share your frustration with the book itself.

However, when all is said and done, one gets over it or one doesn't. I suggest that the game is both innovative and substantive enough to reward its use - perhaps more so than any other game I can think of.

So therefore yet another round of venting about how awful and terrible the Hero Wars book is doesn't strike me as worthwhile. I read it. I played it. It can be done. Granted, it's a matter of every person's personal effort-level to do so, and I can't fault anyone who decides not to. However, I suggest that we return to the point of the thread, as set by Ian, and not get into the familiar litany of the book's faults in layout or organization.

Best,
Ron

[Ian O'Rourke]

However, when all is said and done, one gets over it or one doesn't. I suggest that the game is both innovative and substantive enough to reward its use - perhaps more so than any other game I can think of.

I don't think anyone would disagree that the way the system/setting/concepts are presented in the Hero Wars book acts as a barrier to entry. But, and this is a big but, I think if such a badly (for want of a better word) done book had been put together, but it presented a more traditional gaming ruleset then the problem would not be as big.

I think the game suffers not just because of bad layout, but bad layout of innovative mechanics - very few other games present such complete abstraction from actual events, while remaining rich and details, and providing a mechanic that covers so many issues.

But I think Ron is right, discussing the books flaws is a bit pointless.

Going back to the topic some what I think part of the problem has nothing to do with the system or the group - solved by discussion ahead of time - and I'm pretty good at ensuring the 'same playing field' before gaming. It is to do with may be expectations.

After a four year lack of gaming, I played a 3e game for the last year or so. I have GM'ed only one thing - and that moved away from the traditional enough to fall flat (though group dynamics at the time had something to do with it).

I now don't want another failure due to 'learning the rules' or 'getting to grips with our goals' during play. I just want a good campaign, to get back in the driving seat. This is weighed against me wanting/needing to something different to what went before.

I don't expect an answer to this, it's just a bit of background and psychology behind the issues.

I also realise I think about this shit may be a bit too much :)

[J B Bell]

I hope that a post on "how to get around the printed books' inadequacies" is not considered the same as discussing those inadequacies.

I'm surprised no on has mentioned the rules synopsis.  It puts the needed mechanics in one place in a reasonably clear way (at least, if you've struggled with the book, reading the Synopsis will probably make you go "ooooh, I get it").  It gives you one-stop shopping on the charts you need.  And it includes some sample characters and so forth.

Since you're not using the Glorantha setting anyway, this should do the trick.  (Well, the magic material is still weak as hell, but again, in your own setting, just do your own magic thing.)

--JB

[contracycle]

I'm incline to think that if you are this uncomfortable about it your caution may well be justified; perhaps something else would fill a middle spot bewteen D&D and HW.  You want a something to challenge the simulationist convention, so I'd reccomend something scene-based like Maelstrom perhaps.  If the players are sim-GM's by habit, point out to them that you expect their play to assist maintenance of the sim.   Use the scene-based resolution to practice getting out of thinking in terms of discrete actions but sequences and flows of actions.

Dunno.  I like heros wars mechanically but I too find it a bit tricky to just pick up.

Edited for reference to rules synopsis: yes, this is useful.  Especially after having read the main book, it would definately be worth looking at.

[Blake Hutchins]

Seems we've drifted from the topic of mystics.  For what it's worth, I'll agree the indexing in Hero Wars is poor, but I had no real problem figuring anything out.  None.  In fact, I'll go so far as to say DnD 3e is a lot harder to figure out because of the density of the rules and the large number of unique rules (different powers per class per level).  Once I familiarized myself with the HW book, it was cake to find what I wanted to review.

Of course, I'm an attorney, so I'm used to sifting through dense texts.  Nevertheless -- with respect for those of you who feel otherwise -- methinks the lamenting over the layout is somewhat exaggerated.

Best,

Blake

[Ron Edwards]

Gareth,

I totally agree with your post. I think that Story Engine might well be exactly what Ian is looking for, as that game allows the GM and players to develop, over time, the balance between Story Bones (traditional) and Scene Resolution (funky) that they like the best.

Best,
Ron

[Ian O'Rourke]

I'm willing to look at anything - is this a game I can download? Because if ain't that usual means it is one that is incredibly hard to find. As long as it has some meat to it, a sense of a system being present, rather than narrativist in the sense of being a sheet of A4 :)

Links?

I must admit I've checked over Fudge as well and looked at tweaking that, but that is hardly pushing aside the normal conventions. I could work on it, but I'm not a systems fidler, within reason, just a user.

[contracycle]

http://www.hubris-games.com/html/giv.html

Story Bones rules + charsheet, have not inspected too deeply.

As for HW mystics, the sad fact is a) they're broken, b) they know they're broken, c) they're due for a rewrite in v2

[Mike Holmes]

I'm not sure I agree with the Story Engine recommendation. I think that HW is better, and not all that further out there. In fact some of the "detail" that HW supplies probably is more comfortable for a switch than going to the very little detail of Story Engine. OTOH, perhaps a big simple switch is what you need.

It can't hurt to look, I suppose.

Have you played SOAP with the group yet?

Mike

(edited to remove superfluous link to Hubris)

[Ian O'Rourke]

Funnily enough one of the players was asking about 'the game where you play soap characters' and I provided the link. Now, I've not looked hard at SOAP, so take this with a grain of salt, and also not as a slander on the game (it's a perception issue).

Hero Wars seems like a narrativist role-playing game to me. SOAP sounds like a party-game? I don't mean party game in that it is crap, just that it is....I don't know, I can't find the words for what I want to say without coming across like an ass. It is totally different, hard to compare the two.

You might also be correct about your comparison about Hero Wars and Story Bones. But I'll read and devour anything.

We never got around to trying SOAP - not because of any of the above - it was just time I think.

[contracycle]

Hmm, well I just downloaded a dungeron crawl, of all things, from hubris games and quite interesting it is too.  Even has a little section on the narrative structure of the 'crawl.

[Blake Hutchins]

Story Engine has the advantage that you can explain the entire system in under ten minutes.  It's very streamlined, and I like it a lot.  HW has enough radical stuff at first blush that the learning curve becomes much steeper.

I completely agree with the indexing/layout issue in the sense that it makes it real tough to pass the book to players for casual reference.  You'd be better off explaining things in person or preparing a summary handout.

Best,

Blake

[Mike Holmes]

We never got around to trying SOAP - not because of any of the above - it was just time I think.

HW and SOAP have only one thing in common. But it's important. Playing SOAP teaches players how to think actively in Author and Director stance. Or rather, how to get out of Actor stance.

The neat thing about SOAP is that it is a party game, and crappy in a sorta kitchy way. It's about SOAPs fer goodness sake. That's what makes it easy to play, however. Everybody can create a SOAP story, and nobody worries about doing a great job or anything. You can present it as a throwaway game. And since you can teach the entire game and play in an hour (hour and a half is good), you can just play before or after a more serious game to "warm up" or "cool down".

Next time you ar in the middle of a game and it seems like a good place to stop, but there is still time left, call the game, and proffer a quick, painless game of SOAP.

The reason I always advocate this is because after playing, I guarantee that you and your players will understand playing entirely outside of actor stance. And then when you talk about playing similarly in HW, everyone will nod and say, yes (or no, if they are like my players, sigh).

Mike

[Ian O'Rourke]

Story Engine has the advantage that you can explain the entire system in under ten minutes.  It's very streamlined, and I like it a lot.  HW has enough radical stuff at first blush that the learning curve becomes much steeper.

I will have a good luck at Story Engine - well it's more Story Bones really unless I'm lucky enough to see the system in a store (very unlikely I think). What I really like about Hero Wars is:

(1) The Abstraction of the rules from actual in game actions. It frees up description and allows for the mechanic to apply to many things.
(2) The it way it positions itself to provide the flow/drive of the story, rather than be a resolver of physical actions
(3) The fact keywords can be anything, and can effect roles. Love for Athena can be used to augment a role. The fact the character is demon tainted can be used to augment (or reduce) a roll when interacting with demons. A Noble keyword being used to resist mind magic (rather than it always being Intelligence or something stupid).

I completely agree with the indexing/layout issue in the sense that it makes it real tough to pass the book to players for casual reference.  You'd be better off explaining things in person or preparing a summary handout.

I figured this one out early on - to the extent I was going to re-write the rules as a pamphlet (put them all together really) and batch them together with the 'whole deal - the social contract, the goals behind the campaign and so on. If HW ends up being used I'd still do that.

The summary rules are useful for this purpose. I'd add more though, when it describes augmentations I'd add examples on how this is often how magic is used, and how the Love for Athena keyword can augment any roll, and so on.