QuestWorlds is coming—who else is hyped?

[overgeeked]

I'm never sure which edition people mean when they say HQ2E - the Issaries book that revised Hero Wars, or the Moon Design book that revised HQ1 proper. Technically the Moon Design book was a third version and Questworlds is now the fourth.

The one Chaosium calls HeroQuest 2E.

From the SRD: “The third version HeroQuest: Core Rules was published in 2009 (ISBN 978-0-977785-32-2). We refer to this as HeroQuest 2e.”

 

[PrunellaUK]

I’m curious how different this edition is to the prior editions. I have HeroQuest 2E. Any ideas on what’s so revolutionarily different enough to warrant picking this up?

I'd say a number of things:

• Cleaned-up Contest Mechanic. With the old game it could sometimes be difficult to assess the degree of success or failure of a contest, particularly with edge cases. There were occasions I had to stop play to check the matrix in the book. The new system just counts up successes on each side. No look-ups of matrices are required. Indeed, I can now play with no table lookups whatsoever. It's like a breath of fresh air.
• Extended Contests Become Sequences. The various editions have handled extended contests differently. In QW these become 'sequences', and the book gives you three different types of sequence you can choose for your campaign, from the wagered sequence (similar to Hero Wars extended contests) to scored sequences (used in HQ2e). Basically, players can choose their poison, and these rules are cleaned up to match the core contest mechanic.
• No Rising Actions. That aspect of the mechanics is now gone. Kaput. I confess I never really grokked or used the original version of this, so its elimination is welcome.
• No Pass/Fail Cycle. Like rising actions, this is a piece of what I considered to be faff that I'm grateful is now gone.
• No Hero Points. In their place is a group resource called Story Points, which work somewhat differently, even allowing players to edit or retcon the story where necessary.
• Difficulty Levels. The old system of bumping base values per X sessions has gone. It's replaced with a system of resistance progression that is invoked at key moment. The analogy used is where a campaign progresses from 'season 1' to 'season 2' of a TV show. It's far more situational.
• Experience and Advancement. This is one of the biggest mechanical changes. Basically, the new experience system incentivises players either failing (therefore changing the direction of the story) or invoking character flaws. Once you tot up enough XP, you turn them in for an 'advance', which can be chosen from a smorgasbord of character improvement options.

If that's not enough, new stuff includes:

• Examples. A metric eff-tonne of examples of play.
• Advice. Lots of advice for players and GMs.
• Genre Packs. A structure for creating world settings for QuestWorlds.

All in all a worthwhile package. (Full disclosure: I did some work on the game, so take my words with a pinch of salt.)

 

[overgeeked]

• No Rising Actions. That aspect of the mechanics is now gone. Kaput. I confess I never really grokked or used the original version of this, so its elimination is welcome.
• No Pass/Fail Cycle. Like rising actions, this is a piece of what I considered to be faff that I'm grateful is now gone.

That’s too bad. Those were two of the most interesting and unique things about the system. They brought the game closer to actually emulating a story.

 

[PrunellaUK]

That’s too bad. Those were two of the most interesting and unique things about the system. They brought the game closer to actually emulating a story.

It always felt to me like mechanising something that didn't need to be mechanised. In the end I never used it in my campaigns.

 

[overgeeked]

It always felt to me like mechanising something that didn't need to be mechanised. In the end I never used it in my campaigns.

To each their own, of course. But I disagree. If you’re going to write a game that’s all about turning elements of story into game elements, mechanizing rising action and the try/fail cycle are incredibly important. I was just curious, but I don’t want to drag down the thread. I’ll bow out and let others enjoy.

 

[EthanSental]

I see where some of my causal confusion came about was the HQ glorantha name as well, as I have the runequest glorantha book I mine for ideas, and was thinking it (runequest) was tied in somehow rules wise.

 

[PrunellaUK]

I see where some of my causal confusion came about was the HQ glorantha name as well, as I have the runequest glorantha book I mine for ideas, and was thinking it (runequest) was tied in somehow rules wise.

It's not helped by the fact that HeroQuest Glorantha and RuneQuest Glorantha are in many ways very different takes on the same world. I personally prefer the more epic HeroQuest take on Glorantha, but that may just be me.

 

[Autumnal]

This is a partial answer to @pemerton.

CONTEST FRAMING OVERVIEW

When a conflict arises during the game, you and your GM start by clearly agreeing on:

• Goal—What are you trying to achieve? We also call this the prize.

• Story Obstacle—What are you trying to overcome or what question are you trying to answer?

• Tactic—What are you doing to overcome it?

• Outcome—The GM outlines the possible results of failure.

This process is called framing the contest.

RESOLVING OBSTACLES

Contests in QuestWorlds don’t simply tell you how well you performed at a particular task, they tell you whether or not you overcame a story obstacle, which moves the story in a new direction. Unlike some other roleplaying games, a contest in QuestWorlds does not resolve a task, it resolves the whole story obstacle.

A story obstacle can be resolved in many different ways. For example, if you need secret records that are stored in a vault in a government compound, your goal is to get the information. Resolving that story obstacle may involve many tasks, including: evading patrols, neutralizing guards, lock picking, forging credentials, etc. The contest doesn’t address those tasks individually; rather, it is framed around the one key moment that resolves the story obstacle as a whole.

You will select a character ability to resolve an obstacle. We call this choosing a tactic (see Tactics, p.29). In the example above, this could be a stealth ability to sneak past patrols, a combat ability to take the guards out, or a thief ability to pick a lock. A contest with this ability is the dramatic hinge on which the resolution of the story obstacle rests.

In another example, if an ally has been accused of treason by the king, your goal is to prove their innocence. The king’s threat against your ally is the story obstacle to be overcome. The conflict could be resolved in many different ways. Tasks could involve writs of appeal, gaining the support of disaffected barons, or trial by combat. The overall conflict encompasses all those things. The choice of ability to overcome the obstacle could include Lawyer, Intriguer, or Knight Errant.

A conflict to overcome a story obstacle moves the story forward when it is resolved. If it is merely a step toward resolving a story obstacle, it is a task and not a conflict. While those component tasks may be interesting parts of narrating events, they do not move the story in a new direction. So, your GM should be sure to look for the story obstacle in a conflict when framing a contest.

If there is no story obstacle to your actions, your GM should not call for a contest, but simply let you narrate what you do, provided that seems credible.

For example, you are traveling from one star system to another. On the next planet, you hope to confront the aged rebel who holds long-forgotten secrets that could bring freedom to the galaxy. Your GM feels there is no useful story obstacle for you to contest against, and so lets you describe heading down to the spaceport to secure a ship, meeting the captain and crew of your vessel, and traveling to the next world. Your GM encourages you to summarize what happens quickly, so you can get to the meeting with the old rebel. Your GM knows the story obstacle, convincing the old rebel to part with their secrets, is the real drama.

 

[Horacio]

I have just posted a (very biased) review of QuestWorlds core book:

https://playtesting.org/questworlds-review/

 

[Wolfpack48]

One of the things I always liked about this system was that you could make an encounter as short or as extended as you want. An incidental encounter with a band of orcs? One roll to resolve the battle and see the overall outcome for each side. An extended battle that's the culmination of an entire campaign? Multiple rolls to resolve individual battles between opponents. The flexibility and scalability is awesome.

Also loved making a character from a simple paragraph write-up describing yourself.