Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5888394" data-attributes="member: 27160">Yes, I've played both HQ and RQ a fair degree, and, perhaps, more similarly to what I am thinking of for D&D, Pendragon (Greg Stafford's Arthurian roleplaying game - if you haven't tried it, run, don't walk, to your FLGS and beg, borrow, buy or steal a copy!).My point would be that HQ handles the matter from a conflict resolution (as opposed to task resolution) angle and with a game generally aimed at addressing the mythic themes of Glorantha, rather than seeking emergent stories more indirectly via play immediately focussed on other things, as D&D tends to do.I actually see several systems that address non-physical and non-combat conflict from a conflict resolution, non-Gamist angle; Burning Wheel is perhaps closest to what I'm seeking, but even that is not quite as "strategic" as I would really like to see. Several other "usual suspects" - PrimeTime Adventures, Universalis, Sorceror - also cover the gound. Another "close, but not quite" would be Call of Cthulhu. But, I see a gap in the "market" for a gamist game (which I think D&D is naturally constituted to handle well, due to its ties to level, XP and hit points, not to mention "Vancian" type casting and so on) that is set up to handle "tactical" social and exploratory conflict well.D&D has not done this historically, I agree. But, as I say above, I think the style of game that the D&D combat system quite naturally (to me) trends towards - character resource and positional management to overcome in-game challenges - could be extended quite coherently and smoothly to cover social and exploration challenges in the same vein. Rather than a complete departure - as with, say, switching to a classless game or moving to a non-hit point based damage system - adding 'tactical' systems for non-combat play would seem like a natural extension, to me.Yes, this was why I mentioned Pendragon, and why I am looking for a system specifically unlike HQ and similar. The idea is not that the player character is forced to any specific behaviour unless the player signs up for that restriction first. In Pendragon, no knight has to have an extreme Trait (which might be "Chaste", "Proud", "Merciful" or the like) - but if the player chooses to pursue one such, and achieves it, then the character may be restricted by that trait in some situations. Why would the player choose to pursue such an extreme Trait? Because there are benefits to having them, of course!This is the sort of general tenor I have in mind. A player might choose to take certain character limitations or leave their character vulnerable in the social realm in order to gain tools with which to better overcome certain other social challenges. Social interaction thereby becomes a game all of its own, as engaging - and in quite a similar way - to the game involved when combat challenges are to be overcome.</blockquote>

Verification