My introduction to 3 RPGs of different styles than I'm used to.

[Jhaelen]

Personally, I'd define an RPG as a game in which players take roles and the game's rules do not cover every situation to encourage players creativity in their actions.

That's an odd definition. So, if all possible actions are covered by the rules it cannot be an rpg?

Arkham Horror can be played 'almost' like an rpg, probably even better than 'Hero Quest'. All of the investigators have a personal background and one of the expansions even adds personal goals, so you can decide to make completing them your main goal instead of trying to save Arkham. Basically if you're making every decision from your investigator's viewpoint, where's the difference to an rpg?

Also, I'd recommend to read a couple of session reports (e.g. on Board Game Geeks) for Arkham Horror. Even if they're not written in narrative style, they usually read like a story.

For a boardgame without a game master Arkham Horror is as close to an rpg as you can get.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

Hero Quest, however, is a LOT of fun, and it could easily become RPG-like if done right (in fact, wasn't that the original point of it?)

That's how my friends and I got into roleplaying games. (Although we played the Hasbro HQ, which sounds slightly different than the HQ that the OP played.) We played HQ and started expanding it for more story and interaction and started creating lots of house rules. Then we decided to move onto D&D instead of reinventing the wheel.