my take on hero wars

[joshua neff]

okay, i finally got around to plunking down the cash for the boxed set & started reading thru the books...
& certain things struck me right off the bat--like greg stafford's intro to gloranthan visions, in which he says, "mythology has always been at the core of glorantha"--& the concept of a hero band following in the footsteps of older myths & legends...& then i started thinking about the muchvoiced fear (at least on the internet) of delving into glorantha--"the setting's so rich, i don't have any room to make it my own!" (& yet, people clamor for rich settings w/ lots of metaplot--or at least, companies keep releasing rich-setting games & people keep buying them)...
seems to me, what glorantha & hero wars is all about is creating myths...the pcs are heroes, in the mythic, anthropological sense...in which case, the prepackaged setting of glorantha shouldn't intrude at all, because yr myths should be making the world...the prepackaged stuff is just a touchstone, but it's yr stories, yr adventures, that define & solidify the setting...

on another note--what the fuck is up w/ all the accusations (mostly on rpgnet) that hero wars sucks? that robin d. laws screwed the pooch w/ this one (as opposed to the brilliance of feng shui)? that the rulebook is the worst presentation of rules in a long time? i've seen this kind of stuff over & over again (including one rpgnet poster to accuse justin bacon of "being wrong" when he made a comment in one review of "the brilliance of robin d. laws, designer of feng shui & hero wars") & now that i've started to read the rules, i'm hardpressed to find any more typos than i've found in skarka's underworld or any white wolf book--some, sure, but so what? i'm almost tempted to say it's some sort of weird conspiracy to turn hero wars into another everway--which now that i think on it, makes me think just about every hardcore narrativist rpg that comes out encounters this kind of resistance, as if people wanted to keep them in "cult" status...
okay, rant over...

[james_west]

I guess I had two objections to it, both extremely
superficial:

(1) I hate the cover art.
(2) The format seems really cheap; I'd almost rather have
    a .pdf than something that's bound the way a paperback
    is, and on paper cheaper than most paperbacks use.

I'd also like to say that while the mechanics for this are as well adapted to narrativism as almost any, they're still probably more focused on simulationism (note the absence of any explicit mechanics for players to affect the outcome of anything more substantial than the description of a specific contest). The only thing I think you couldn't do well with it is gamism.

That having been said, although I haven't used the system yet, I think it's one of the most innovative I've seen, and although the setting isn't my thing at the moment, I've always thought it was quite original, and very playable. I think it's one of the best $20 I've spent.

                      - James

[joshua neff]

I'd also like to say that while the mechanics for this are as well adapted to narrativism as almost any, they're still probably more focused on simulationism (note the absence of any explicit mechanics for players to affect the outcome of anything more substantial than the description of a specific contest).

hmmmm...while i haven't made my way thru all the rules yet, i have yet to find a rule that's oriented towards anything other than story-creation, so i'm not sure if i see any simulationism in it...
the more i read, tho, the more excited i get about the rules...here you've been given 4 different systems of magic that cover a whole range of traditional fantasy magics...i could definitely see using the rules for yr own homegrown setting, & using 1 or more of the magical systems (like, say, a world in which animism is the only magic)...
anyway, i like the system a lot...a whole lot...


[ This Message was edited by: joshua neff on 2001-06-03 17:16 ]

[james_west]

No argument on that - my first impulse was also to steal the system for something else. It is a nicely done system, and just screams "narrativism". However, with the exception of use of Hero Points, which is the most unoriginal part of the system, the outcome of a contest is pretty much dictated by character skills and nothing else. That having been said, it allows a much broader range of effective approaches to a conflict (which, perhaps, makes it a better simulation ...)

[Ron Edwards]

James,

".... pretty much dictated by character skills and nothing else"

This element of Hero Wars doesn't have any direct implication for its G/N/S status. Historically, yes, Simulationist game design has often relied on long skill list, but the Hero Wars "ability" is a much broader and more flexible animal.

In my experience, the really powerful Narrativist mechanics are augmentation and lending APs. The Hero Wars forum on GO has a few posts from me about the former.

Also, in my game, one of the best implications of the augment is that players tend to spend Hero Points for improving abilities that AUGMENT well - thus, instead of building up their "sword" ability, they focus on affinities and relationships. Thus the character tends to develop as a PERSON (=protagonist) rather than merely racking up more "sword-oomph."

Lending APs during Extended Contests is startling during play - it really, really changes the immediate conflict, and since it demands post-hoc explanation (the points are there; they can be lent; done; NOW say why), it encourages massive player Author/Director input.

Best,
Ron

[Levekius]

On 2001-06-02 18:20, joshua neff wrote:
on another note--what the fuck is up w/ all the accusations (mostly on rpgnet) that hero wars sucks? that robin d. laws screwed the pooch w/ this one (as opposed to the brilliance of feng shui)? that the rulebook is the worst presentation of rules in a long time? i've seen this kind of stuff over & over again (including one rpgnet poster to accuse justin bacon of "being wrong" when he made a comment in one review of "the brilliance of robin d. laws, designer of feng shui & hero wars")

Tsk tsk tsk... I am the "poster" in question. It's not what happened. :smile:

First of all, a link to the review by Justin:

http://www.rpg.net:443/news+reviews/reviews/rev_4317.html

Next, here is what Bacon said in the review:

Robin D. Laws is the esteemed designer of Feng Shui and Hero Wars, among sundry other products of high quality.

In the forum just below said review, here is my exact reply:

Ok. I think I've read/heard this one times too many. :smile:

Justin, nice work doing thirty-something reviews and all, but I think you were less than fair in your assessment here.

Replace "Robin Laws" with "Peter Grimson" on the cover of Hero Wars. What happens then ? It becomes one of the worst offering of last year. Because Hero Wars was poorly written and poorly edited.

In fact, Hero Wars reminded me much, when I bought it, of your review of Sovereign Stone 1st edition. A piece of crap released at least 2-3 months too soon. Barely playable as is. Crappy layout, typos abounding, lack of setting info, system doesn't make sense until you translate three times in your head what Laws had in mind, etc...

Honestly, I think you fell in the trap of many a reviewer here. That of judging a book by the hype around it.

Now, you're not saying Hero Wars is clever. You want us to believe it's a high-quality product. Which it is simply not. So I have to conclude either you did not read the same book I did, or maybe you trusted second-hand opinions on this one ?

Joshua, I think there is a huge difference between questioning Laws' brilliance and questionning Hero Wars' high quality, don't you think ?

AS I said all along, I do not question the cleverness of Hero Wars. I think I made that clear repeatedly (or at least I tried). I question the quality of the product. It lacks a "finishing touch" IMO.

I will also admit that I do raise the bar in some instances. The Glorantha franchise coupled with Laws' involvement... plus an almost charity-like campaign to fund that new edition of the game.

Simply put, folks on a much smaller budget with less ressources have done a better job as far as quality is concerned.

It should also be mentioned that you bought the boxed set. I only had the main rulebook. This may (or may not, you tell me) explain why I found this book lacking in some respects.

Joshua, we're in 2001. All the electronic tools are there to help correct mistakes, typos and chaotic layout. There is no excuse to have a small table split on two pages for no other reasons than sheer negligence.

The product looks cheap to me. The writing is thick, difficult. A total newbie would be lost and need several readings to get the point.

To use the language that you folks use, this is a great narrative-inclined system. But the packaging is horrible. Any time a new edition of a game is planned only months after the original, you know something is wrong.

A properly edited version will go a long way to correct 75% of the issues. That one looked like a rough draft. I do not expect you to believe me, but contrary to what you seem to think, I kind of dig Laws' designs.

Just bought Rune and Dying Earth together this very week. Hero Wars has been his weakest effort, IMO.

i'm hardpressed to find any more typos than i've found in skarka's underworld or any white wolf book--some, sure, but so what? i'm almost tempted to say it's some sort of weird conspiracy to turn hero wars into another everway--which now that i think on it, makes me think just about every hardcore narrativist rpg that comes out encounters this kind of resistance, as if people wanted to keep them in "cult" status...

Don't know what you're talking about. You have to be paranoid to even *joke* like this. Seriously, there's nothing there. People pick games that appeal to them. If anything, the gamers on the internet are more open to narrative designs than the average customer at the LGS.

I'm afraid I don't master the notions of the threefold model, but from what I know (and I apologize if I'm mistaken) it looks like the "gamist" systems are still the "saveur du jour".

It has nothing to do with Narrativist games being shunned. People just prefer something else right now.

As for Everway, I like it a lot. But it is understandable that it didn't work as planned. It was a radical departure from the norm back then.

I planned to introduce myself in my first post, but I felt I really needed to correct what you said first. I'm lucky you mentioned me as "a poster" and not by my handle. Please make sure you get the facts straight before posting stuff like that.

All these discussions can be divisive enough (even though there is no reasons for them to be) without stuff like this.

Hope this cleared out any misunderstanding.

Later.

[joshua neff]

levekius--

sorry to have taken yr comments out of context, & i appreciate you showing up to set me to rights...

altho i will say that, 2001 or not, i still didn't find anything wrong w/ hero wars's production or presentation...it doesn't look all that cheap to me--but then, the store i bought it from has a copy of synnibarr on the opposite shelf, & maybe i'm judging by comparison...or maybe i have different standards of what "cheap" is--i'm a big fan of xeroxed zines & handmade tapes & cds..."slick" production (like, say, wizards of the coast) doesn't impress me (& i'm not trying to imply that i infer you think it should, i'm just saying, so you know where i'm coming from)...i think hero wars looks just dandy, as does the first edition of maelstrom & ron's pdf of sorcerer...plus, i bought the boxed set which has the basic rules as a separate sheet (& i downloaded the pdf from http://www.glorantha.com )...in fact, of all of robin's games, i'd say feng shui is the one i'm least impressed w/ (well, i haven't gotten around to reading rune yet, since in general it ain't my style of play)...i think hero wars & dying earth are both masterpieces...

& yes, the conspiracy comment was, for the most part, a joke...i'm not really all that paranoid...


[ This Message was edited by: joshua neff on 2001-06-06 19:36 ]

[ This Message was edited by: joshua neff on 2001-06-06 19:37 ]

[ This Message was edited by: joshua neff on 2001-06-06 19:38 ]

[Levekius]

Joshua, I'm just starting Dying Earth. And seriously, this is quickly turning into my favorite release of the year so far !

I'll have to read the novels again. The game really draws you into this world.

I'm glad we got this misunderstanding fixed. And I'm glad you like Hero Wars. I like it too now that I understand it. But I really think the 2nd edition is gonna rock (based on the job that was done in the translation).

I think Feng Shui has a lot of merits, being one of his first game, it's quite impressive IMO. But it's my least favorite of his offerings too. Probably because it's not a favorite genre of mine.

Take care :smile:

[joshua neff]

martin--

at the risk of this turning into the "robin d. laws" forum--

i read the first 2 dying earth books a few months ago & thought they were pretty cool...& then the game came out & for whatever reason, i was feeling sort of blase about the whole thing--but then i ordered it, & when i started to read it, my feet started tapping excitedly...i think it's just fab as all hell...

& ron's been trumpeting hero wars since it came out, & even tho i used to have the original runequest, i still didn't feel like i wanted to actually buy the damn thing--i think it was the cost & the rich setting (i'm sort of down on copious amounts of prepackaged setting these days)...but since i'm planning on moving in around 6 months, i thought i should pick it up, just on the off chance i move somewhere were people are playing it (fully thinking "yeah, i'd play it, but i wouldn't run it")--& again, my feet started tapping exitedly, & i started thinking of ideas for narratives i could run (for example, a babylon 5-esque narrative, set in a lunar outpost city)...

as for feng shui...i'm not the biggest action movie fan, but i quite like the hong kong variety...but feng shui has some design features i have issues w/ (particularly that characters are penalized for complex actions, even as the players are encouraged to describe complex actions)...

[Pyske]

On 2001-06-06 20:17, joshua neff wrote:
...but feng shui has some design features i have issues w/ (particularly that characters are penalized for complex actions, even as the players are encouraged to describe complex actions)...

Eh?  Forgive me for being off topic, but I hope you won't mind if I throw a quote at you.  Pg 149 of Daedalus edition Feng Shui:

Important Note: Since we want to encourage fancy attack descriptions, the GM should not assess an Action Value penalty to attacks that seek no extra benefit, even if they sound more difficult than a basic attack.

Was there something specific that contradicts this that I might have missed?

OK, trying to haul myself back on topic, a couple people mentioned having considered using Hero Wars as a generic system.  Would you think this would work for less high-powered genres, or would the rules break in a "grittier" environment?  How would you adapt the rules to accomodate such genres?

 . . . . . . . -- Eric

[Ron Edwards]

Eric,

The Feng Shui issue has been discussed at great length elsewhere on the Forge. My take on the matter is this:

The BEST modifier one may hope for with a stunt is NO penalty, which is hardly an endorsement of stunts, as far as system design is concerned. Contrast this with a system in which stunts are rewarded by definition - that if they are announced, a bonus is AUTOMATICALLY applied.

As you said, this is wildly off-topic. Please feel free to e-mail me if you want to discuss it more.

Best,
Ron

[james_west]

Hero wars is inherently designed to be very scaleable. I don't anticipate a problem using a lower power level.