Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Davenport
And what made it difficult for me was trying to get a grip on the way that all of the various subsystems interact. As Chelemby says above, they <u>do</u> interact beautifully -- I can see that much. It's just that I can't handle the level of detail involved. The hardest part, I suppose, was the fact that the details steadily build upon other details, and the end result simply felt overwhelming to me. And even if I did get it, I know from experience that this level of detail would be too much for me to track during play.
|
And do you know Dan? That should be me too. I'm increasingly a lite ruley dude, going for free flowing HeroQuest as my go get rule system. I did a lot of FGU in the 80s, but I have made a full recovery. Or have I...?
Oddly BW just gelled with me completely bucking this trend. I just layer on as much of the game I feel i can cope with at any one time. The Duel of Wits looked mechanistic to me on reading, but play beautifully and create a real game aspect to a tense discussion. Save this for the decisions that change the course of the game or where the players want to focus on the argument.
I didn't have the luxury of being able to lay in a few games before GMing, I just had to pitch in and go with it. I certainly had my moments! I can now run con games with six players using the full(ish) Fight! mechanics against a dozen opponents without breaking a sweat. Maybe it is my my C&S roots coming back to me?
If anything I'd say try and play it some more, it might turn out much easier in play than it appears in the book. That was my experience. It has always felt like a campaign game to me.
Another fabulous review anyway.
Cheers