Test played Reviews: Dungeon World
Test played Reviews: OpenQuest
Test played Reviews: HeroQuest
Heroquest was a game that started out with a lot of lacking information. Fortunately for them, I was able to actually find enough information from the Wikipedia rules summary, two great rules reviews, two forum posts explaining rules, and a gameplay YouTube video to actually put together enough information to test play the simple rules-lite system - even without a sample game book.
It was the clear winner of the games that lack playable sample rules.
It even defeated it's first competitor in phase III, the testplay battle rounds.
Heroquest - E - I can't find much about this version.
Phase 1 - Losers Bracket
To try figuring out the rules of several games, I arranged a loser's bracket to evaluate other alternative sources of information about the game. Here is how the loser's bracket was structured.
Heroquest joined the other Loser's bracket games in the criteria evaluation for material that I could find. Unknown information was left blank, which in effect acts as a zero or E.
Phase II - My Criteria Evaluation
I'm not going to format the criteria into table for the losers round. First up Heroquest, based mostly on a video of play. Missing scores means I can't evaluate the system from what I saw and are treated like E 0 in the scoring.
10 Major Criteria & 10 Sub-criteria Heroquest
1. Depth - B 3
a. Meaningful - B 3
b. Utilized Functions - B 3
2. Flexible/Adaptable - C 2
3. Consistency - B 3
4. Understandable - D 1
5. Character - A 4
a. Behavior tied to character - A 4
b. Unique Character - B 3
6. Combat System - C 2
a. Turn/move/action -
b. Attack speed/ hastened/quicker -
7. Spell System -
a. Spell Regulatory - D 1
b. Spell Breadth - D 1
8. Creatures - D 1
a. Standard Fantasy -
b. Creation -
9. Content -
10. Aesthetic - C 2
a. Meaningful - does data recorded makes a difference in the game?
b. Utilized Functions - are there multiple uses for data recorded?
2. Flexible/Adaptable - how usable is it with other custom settings?
3. Consistency - how many different systems are there within the game?
4. Understandable - are concepts defined before they are presented, Or is it just a rule dump without explanation?
5. Character - how is behavior explained and can characters be unique?
a. Behavior tied to character - how well does the data determine how a character behaves?
b. Unique Character - can the characters stand out from other characters of similar nature?
6. Combat System - are the mechanics interesting and innovative?
a. Turn/move/action - does the game use the same boring turn based mechanics?
b. Attack speed/ hastened/quicker - will having higher quickness make the attacks go faster and multiple times?
7. Spell System - does the game use the boring overused spell set?
a. Spell Regulatory - how does the game use data to limit magical powers?
b. Spell Breadth - is there a wide variety, yet coherently grouped collection of spells?
8. Creatures - how many provided creatures are available?
a. Standard Fantasy - does the game provide the expected common monsters and creatures?
b. Creation - are there creature creation rules so that I can add my own creatures?
9. Content - is the overall content presented in the core detail depth and have variety. Do elements differ in sufficient degree among other data?
10. Aesthetic - does the game have a subjective coolness factor?
I plan on using the A, B, C, D, and E again, this time tying them to points so I can convert it into a total value for the game.
For each criteria
A = 4 - beyond my expectation
B = 3 - great
C = 2 - sufficient
D = 1 - below my expectation
E = 0 - horrible, unusable
Total evaluation = sum of criteria/20
Phase III Testing the game.
1) total grade from phase II 1.65
2) character creation test 4
3) skill system test 2
4) combat system test 1
5) magic system test 1
Total score 9.65
Average 4 pt scale 1.93
Certainly HQ made exactly the character that I wanted, due to the using my own Keyword, skills, abilities, and magic. It receives max score.
The mechanics felt like a roll under version of any other simple narrative game, resolving entire battles with one roll. I gave it a mediocre for skills, and low scores for combat and magic. Something felt largely lacking for some reason - probably because of the narrative summary focus of resolution - lacking details.
In a story, there is narrative summaries which add transitions.
"And Wiluwichi defeated the mighty Korkrisp spider using his newly honed stick-blade skills."
Where as the extended contests felt like a race of numbers, rather than a series of battling maneuvers. I cared more for the number than describing what was happening.
Neither felt satisfying in themselves, I guess because of missing details. If I didn't care about the pile of numbers, extended contests might feel more meaningful.
|Battle Musician (Keyword)||17|
|Son of Epimo'olv ‘Blood Bear’||19|