It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Anyhow, with regards to Lenny's comments, you may note that one of my biggest influences for how I adapted HQ (and thence how we've made Other Worlds) is my play of FATE.
Posted By: Mike Holmesas for the repercussions of something like this, it simply follows the standard system... which I now realize I completely forgot to employ in play at the Con. But, essentially, every contest may result in one side or the other getting a new temporary trait - often a flaw for the loser. Basically if you take consequences, you are simply allowing the opponent to tag you with a new trait. The level of the ability of the trait is based on the abilities you used to inflict it, and the level of victory rolled.
Posted By: Mike HolmesAnother fun effect of this system is that it means that incremental character advancement is replaced by getting whole abilities at a relatively "full" level of competence. This is something that people clamored for with HQ, and we've solved that problem. Using one system that covers both angles of abilities as "situational modifiers" and "character advancement."Mike
Posted By: Alvin FrewerThat's awesome stuff Mike. I've been trying to implement that in HeroQuest in my Exalted game, and sometimes the numbers seem to be a bit funny. But that style seems to fit a lot better than the very low increases from spending Hero Points in HQ.I'm really looking forward to taking this for a spin, too.
Posted By: DenysAlvin -- how have you been doing it? That is, what rating are you giving these temp abilities (via win/loss)?
Holmesian and Humphreysian, actually, but yeah. :-)
Wire me five billion Zimbabwean dollars and your email address and I'll put you on the list.