HQ, AHQ, and WHQ differences

[Davane]

I'm going to address the urban myth that Gary Gygax hated Wizards separately here, because that's not strictly true.

The issue comes from the fact that there was a certain assumption of power within wizards, because fantasy literature essentially made them out to be gods. They could pretty much DO anything. It was relatively easy to keep Wizards in check during wargames, since most Wizards simply wanted to blast, scare, or otherwise attack enemies, or to defend allies. To avoid the whole "I have a wizard, I win" scenario within wargames, Wizards were given limitations in accordance with the chainmail rules set. After all, it doesn't matter if Wizards can do anything and everything, when most battles only lasted four to six turns, and the Wizard still had to choose what they wanted to do in each turn, because the ultimate "kill everything and win" spell was ruled out simply for the sake of still having a game in the first place.

The problem is that when Wizards moved from Chainmail to D&D, they were coming from the position of power in Chainmail where they were still able to do virtually anything, but battles lacked the time to do it all at once. One of the key features of such dungeon exploration was that seeing as Heroes could come and go as they leave, could rest, and do all the other fun stuff where you are only controlling a single character rather than an army, the time constraints of wizards and battles went out the window. There's nothing fun for a wizard that can walk through and destroy any encounter, whilst any counter that could provide almost a challenge for the wizard could obliterate any other hero with ease.

Thus, some sort of balance was needed, and Gygax opted for a Vancian approach to magic. Wizards only had so many slots for spells. In battle, it's not unreasonable for a Wizard to simply load up and unleash all their most powerful spells in combat, protected by the rest of the army. But on their own, away from the army, Wizards needed to ration these slots, so they couldn't just kill everything, all the time.

Add to that the issue of character growth. In battle, Heroes and Wizards were already powerful, but the emerging D&D game was about individual characters growing over their experiences. Knowing what a mid to high level wizard was like was okay, but what about a low level wizard? What happened is that gygax simply worked back from the mid to high level wizard who could cast 4 to 6 fireballs a day, to a point where the could only cast one weak spell per day, as both the amount of magic they could use, and it's power, was scaled down. For heroes, by contrast, everything was much more linear, as Heroes basically got stronger/more attacks and more hit points.

Wizards got nerfed, because all characters got nerfed, so that they had a base to grow from. It's just that in terms of power, wizards got nerfed into a sort of s-curve, rather than a linear progression. This led to the idea that Gygax hated wizards, but he didn't, not at the time of such design work. What Gygax hated about wizards was that magic itself was such an easily abused ability, and that players would happily abuse it if they could. Thus running adventures for Wizards would become a nightmare, which, in truth, they still are for many GMs. Of course, what's good for the goose is also good for the gander, so Wizards also become some of the most powerful NPCs and villains, and the bane of many player's adventures.

Of course, as people have cried about wizards and their power, games have evolved away from the idea that from little acorns, mighty oaks do grow, so now magic is a lot more utilitarian and a lot less wonderful. Now wizards can shoot fire from their fingers like fighters swing swords or archers use arrows, because in the end, that's all combat has really become. Wizards can grow into heavy artillery, and leave very little for the rest of the party to do, but as long as they can still ping foes to death like other heroes can kill gobbos, all is good...

The idea that Wizards are weaklings to become gods is being forgotten, because Wizards must have something to do in every encounter, leading to concepts like the Warlock. The wizards still have that S-curve in power, it's just that now they must also match the linear progression of other Heroes as well, and other heroes must match the S-curve of the Wizard, leading to everyone becoming cookie cutter heroes, where they are all able to use powers like Wizards and tank like fighters, otherwise, it's simply "not fun"...

[iKarith]

That was the other reason I haven't been rushing to it, to be honest. When you suggested it, several folks came up and said they'd kinda like the non-branded open-licensed rule set, but it kinda seemed like you already knew what you wanted to do and made up your mind what the outcome was going to look like. In some ways that's a good thing because those wanting the open, non-branded open-source thing kinda said we wanted that and then kinda let it hang for a bit there. At least in my case it was because I didn't know what the thing I was thinking about would look like just yet, except that what I was kind of imagining would not work.

I was kind of imagining a set of rules divided into sections—characters, movement, combat, etc, in two-column format like my old 2E D&D books had, but shorter, with like colored page borders so it was fast to turn to the rules for whatever, and put into a loose leaf binder so it was easy to add to. It'd come to a place where it would describe something you need rules for and just have them where NA/EU agreed or, where they didn't, an Option 1/Option 2 box to let the EW choose the rule they wished to use. Y'know, again kinda like my old D&D books had back in the day.

And there'd be a conspicuous place between the rules for a particular thing to slot in a template with other optional rules about that thing and we'd make up a nice template that had the same page border, and each option would indicate what things beyond a single copy of the Game System.

That … isn't going to work. First, if you were going to put the rules for HQ into a binder, it'd need to be one of those mini-binders I used in college. There's not enough HQ rules to put into a standard 3 ring binder for 8.5x11 Freedom Units paper or 3 (4?) ring for A4 for … the rest of the world who has sense enough to use the same thing.

Unless you were printing it at iKarith font sizes of course, which … I mean, I might do that. But the whole idea of what that looks like was wrong, I concluded, since ultimately that would just be HQ rules and Hasbro owns those. We can't just take their name off it and claim it's open source now, free to be used in commercial products or not, no strings attached. That's literally the opposite of how things work!

I since concluded that the generic open source rules would have to be that: Generic. Rather than supplying two options corresponding to NA or EU rules, you'd leave the specifics to someone else to fill in with whatever specifics they want. The result is too generic to be called complete, but it's also too generic for Hasbro to say it's "from" their game even though I do spend a LOT of time here at the Inn where we discuss their game primarily, in what for some must seem like painfully exact detail. But for incomplete, it should be easy enough to fill in the missing bits and you have exactly the HQ rules. Or something very different, you choose.

Those are fair criticisms, I suppose.

It wasn't a criticism, really, except of us being indecisive and generally wanting something a little different than you proposed, but not knowing exactly what. Essentially, I didn't want to go stepping on your toes in your own thread as I bumbled around trying to do something different.

I would like to point out that I decided to incorporate the cards and other necessary components, as it seems like a lot of the rules are actually covered on them rather than in the rule book, and currently the HQ CERB stands at 44 pages in a 12-pt font with easily readable headings. At the moment, I'm still compiling text, so the HQ CERB could drop some pages with formatting, and other layout options. This is the meat of the project, as it only covers the Game System, but the idea that it only fits a few pages are somewhat laughable without actually looking at it.

I remain convinced that the instruction manual, by any name, could be literally told in four pages (two sheets) of standard paper in a 12 pt font with a 6 pt separator and 16 pt headings. Two columns, and space for a stylized title—possibly only column-wide, I admit. The result would be suitable for board game players who know the jargon board gamers use. Pretty much, if someone can follow Tom Vassel's reviews, they'd be able to follow such a rule set.

Huh, I wonder if Tom realizes how much jargon he uses? Consequently, he does demonstrate the mechanics to define the jargon by example, so watching Dice Tower videos would prepare you to read the document I would propose could be written. Such a document could be made from any edition of HQ and would be identical save the differences you've figured out between them. It condenses heavily when you don't have to explain it to n00bs.

It would be useful to expand that out to language appropriate for the new players since we'd like to drag them int—er, invite them to play with us. But doing this would not result in the legally unencumbered foundation several of us wanted.

In terms of what I want - since I have HQ, AHQ, and WHQ, I can see the overlap and describe in very broad strokes what a combination game would be like. However, before I get to that, I am working on CERBs which are more of a complete reference work for each title, designed for those that want to recreate each game for their own enjoyment. Obviously, I can't copy everything, so I have tried to focus on what makes the game functional over all. For example, I have nearly finished with the GS, but I haven't included the Quest Book, even though the Quests serve as the meat of the system. But then, there's more than enough fan quests here that can cover the Quest Book being left out. However, although I wasn't originally going to include them, I felt that many components included rules that would otherwise have been in a rulebook, such as Spells and Equipment.

They certainly would have been part of the rule book if HQ was a role-playing game. As a board game, it makes sense that they are on cards and the like. That's generally how such things are done in board games. Of course, you're looking to combine multiple games that are designed to shift into being RPGs, so that's going to make more sense.

In terms of decision making between rules sets, I have tried to intelligently choose which version I would include as the base system, and which would be house rules. The idea is that it SHOULD be possible for either version of the game to be playable using the CERB. I have done my best to limit what changes I have made to the rules, and the only real change is breaking up Passages into corridors and junctions. Although this is mostly for logistical reasons, I discovered that applying the "must be in the room to search for traps" rules meant an additional complication if you keep Corridors and Junctions as discrete, which I have yet to fix. To imagine it, think as if you have put a doorway between each Junction and Corridor section on each map. Of course, any fix to this also fixes the issue with traps beyond doors, so I am not adverse to leaving this complication in to be fixed later.

Another real purpose of the CERB is to clear up any ambiguity in certain scenarios. For example, the line of sight rules. Right now, there's no difference between line of sight and line of effect, so if you can see it, you can shoot it. However, map reveals aren't based solely on line of sight, so you can reveal features that you cannot see. Thus, you can see everything in a room, even if it's hidden behind furniture, as long as you don't have to search for it, and you can see all monsters in a passage, even if they are standanding behind one another and therefore not technically visible for "line of sight".

The discussion we had about viewability vs. line of sight, yeah. There are a few such things in the rules but I think we usually wind up sorting them here in the forums. Most often they're not actual ambiguities, merely perceptual ones.

As such, it would be nice if you could check out the HQ CERB, even if it's really just a case of checking my homework, to see if there's anything I missed, any conflict that needs resolving, or areas that could be considered for improvement. Just bear in mind that the HQ CERB is designed primarily as a reference work, for combination with future AHQ and WHQ CERBs, and as such house rules desired now might actually be covered or made redundant in such works.

I've been trying to respond to this all afternoon. We had a major appliance asplode and flooding and cleanup and repair guys and ordering a replacement because Kenmore isn't really a thing anymore and … yeah.

Yeah, AHQ is really meant to be played with HQ from what I can tell, so that's fine. And I have to make custom cheatsheets anyway as I need to be able to read them.

On the contrary, AHQ is a complete game in it's own right, and the supplemental information for using HQ components with AHQ takes up 3 pages of the 62 page rulebook. It's just that a lot of fans have both AHQ and HQ, and as such, they favour combining the two to the point at which they seem like both are always being played together. If anything, the AHQ rules were designed to supercede the HQ rules, to the point that it includes rules for playing the HQ Game System Quest Book using the AHQ rules, and the four Heroes from HQ presented as AHQ Heroes.

Yeah, so they tell me. But you have encounters against a whole bunch of things that aren't in the box (but are in the HQ box) and a bunch of optional rules to use the HQ furniture and other stuff, rules for bringing characters and things from HQ to AHQ … For being its own thing, it's kinda pretty significantly actually but not technically dependent upon having access to a Game System box full of stuff.

Of course you could just make an absolutely large sum investment in Citadel minis instead of buying HQ. I mean, GW would've loved if you did. But I really do think they assumed you'd have a Game System to pull from, and sure enough, I don't know any AHQ owners who don't also have HQ.

So I'd need some Minotaurs, rats? not skaven?, orc archers, snotlings, spiders, and bats… My goblins are HQ, so they're not spearmen, but unless expansions called for other goblins, HQ's minis will work in a pinch. And with 4x the GS white sprues I probably have enough undead. The stuff I'd need are the sort that Reaper tends to sell in multipacks anyway, so that helps.

Nope, WHQ used Giant Rats, not Skaven. There were rumours that a Skaven expansion was also planned, and this is backed up by a Skaven-themed WD article, but the base game itself decided that it was going with a much more Orcy theme. Of course, the Roleplay Book included rules for Skaven, as part of the 66 page bestiary, which is not a bad chunk for a mighty 192 page tome. The LotOL expansion included many different specialist types of goblins, but none of the minis, so unless you specifically needed multiple types of gobbos, you could get away with them fair enough. In WHQ, goblins are deemed only to fight with either bows or spears, which makes things a little bit easier for you.

Dire rats it is then. I'll need some of those too. Makes sense, though. I think I would like to hit up Reaper for the needed minis for WHQ. I probably should focus on Terror in the Dark first though as that's kind of important for making AHQ feel a little more complete and I do have that. Haven't got any of WHQ yet.

Did get my German dice. Glossy, sadly. Kurgan says the ink on the glossy ones is somewhat fragile, so I won't be using them until they get a gentle bath and a coat or two of polycrylic and possibly some of this Tamiya matte spray on top of that so they'll be viewable on camera whenever I get set up for that.

[Shadzar]

I'm going to address the urban myth that Gary Gygax hated Wizards separately here, because that's not strictly true.

The issue comes from the fact that there was a certain assumption of power within wizards,

Not sure how in the world i ended up here when looking up recent E Gary Gygax Jr stuff that has nothing to do with HQ (blame Google)... nor why Gary's views on wizards would have any bearing on HQ but...

Gary hated wizards for one reason. Rob Kuntz, aka Robilar. He didn't hate the class, he hated Rob's wizard character that would circumvent every last thing Gary planned or tried to plan by thinking outside of the box with his spells.

Now how this CAN relate to HQ is the pass through walls spell. Rob, I think, on one occasion used such a spell to bypass all the monsters and traps Gary had planned, and grab the treasure and everyone left the dungeon without having to fight. GP = XP then, so they got the XP from finding the gold, not fighting any of the monsters.

Now in D&D that can be mitigated with a DM, where you don't pass into a wall and get stuck depending on spell length, but HQ prevents such shenanigans because the length of time of the spell lasts only long enough to let someone get stuck inside a wall if they don't know what they are doing or where they are going as there is no real scrying in HQ to find out the dungeon floorplan.

[Davane]

The thing is, isn't that the point of the Wizard, and magic in general? When GP = XP, the power levels of Heroes were so ridiculously low (by today's standards), that you needed a party of 6 to 8 players, of which at least four were various Fighters, just to be able to deal with anything. Thus, the aim was to get the treasure and get out, and if magic allowed you to do that, then you were succeeding.

Seems to me that Gary Gygax was just being a bad loser, because one of his players continually outsmarted him. The problem is that as much as Gary Gygax was a creator of D&D, having come from Chainmail, he was still very monster and combat oriented, and most of this tricks and traps were predictable because of this.

In HeroQuest, whilst the Evil Wizard can create some devious tricks, the majority of the game comes from fighting monsters and completing quests, so bypassing monsters is actually just bypassing the game. Whilst I have some ingenious uses for Pass Through Walls and the like, these utility spells are probably some of the most underused spells in the game, because they seem to essentially bypass the game.

In my current VT game of HQ, I have taken to outlining areas of solid rock in Black, so it can be subtly differentiated from the other walls where there is something behind, because there's little fun in having Heros stuck in Solid Rock. It's bad enough that my players have decided that they have learnt enough to never search for treasure if it means that they might draw from the Treasure Deck, thus depriving the Evil Wizard of one of the most significant tools within their arsenal. But, hey, that's smart play for a game where Gold really doesn't mean anything, and it's what I would do as a player, so how can I be upset because of it when my players do it?

[Kurgan]

I can see players avoiding treasure searches once they are "equipped" (having 3/4 attack and defense dice). This actually happened in one of our group's ongoing sessions. They were playing harder quests, so got good equipment early on. There was no threat of having their gear stolen or otherwise destroyed by rust, so why take the risk of an unblockable hit from a hazard? (I introduced torches to give a way around this, though they cost gold and don't last forever, so...).

If the point of a quest is to find an object, they will search for that object and once it is found they will stop, in the above case.

I notice that early official quests give gold rewards for surviving or completing the task, while later ones tend to rely on you collecting the treasure yourself within the quest.

The Evil Wizard deck lets me harass the heroes with random stuff even if they never search for treasure, and they have combat cards to try to counter some of that stuff too.

There's still value in gold for buying potions of course, so you are either searching to get them or searching to get money to buy them. But if they can basically handle ever fight and rarely get damaged enough to need to use the couple of healing spells, then searching would seem less important.

I was going to have the Emperor put out a reward - a list of bounties for each wandering monster slain, so that could be a motivation to turn it into a plus. Then there's the Parley "Lone Monster" deck.

[Shadzar]

Gary hated wizards for one reason. Rob Kuntz, aka Robilar. He didn't hate the class, he hated Rob's wizard character that would circumvent every last thing Gary planned or tried to plan by thinking outside of the box with his spells.

Hey stupid, stop being old! Your memory aint what it used to be!...

Jim Ward had Drawmij the wizard.. Robilar was Sir Robilar the knight...

too much recent news with Jim, Rob, Ernie, etc.. i got myself confused. Not to say Rob Kuntz didn't pull his own shenanigans, but it has nothing to do with Gary's hate of wizards, or how spells were made for HQ.

[/memory_fart]

[Davane]

Gary hated wizards for one reason. Rob Kuntz, aka Robilar. He didn't hate the class, he hated Rob's wizard character that would circumvent every last thing Gary planned or tried to plan by thinking outside of the box with his spells.

Hey stupid, stop being old! Your memory aint what it used to be!...

Jim Ward had Drawmij the wizard.. Robilar was Sir Robilar the knight...

too much recent news with Jim, Rob, Ernie, etc.. i got myself confused. Not to say Rob Kuntz didn't pull his own shenanigans, but it has nothing to do with Gary's hate of wizards, or how spells were made for HQ.

[/memory_fart]

I knew what you meant, Shadzar. Gygax's Greyhawk campaign was notorious for it's wizards, and the Circle of Eight, which were all PCs at one point or another. Few other players have made nearly as much of an impact on the game of D&D as these...