Re: [DL] Hexslinger revision (Spoilers? Boy Howdy!)

["Mr. Christopher McGlothlin, M.Ed." <sosentinel@adelphia.net>]

At 07:23 AM 3/4/2002, Roy wrote:
>The original Hexslinger (as per Law Dog's definition of the word) was a
>fantastic idea - however needed a little more separating from the
>huckster AB, IMO.

         Agreed, but I must point out that the editing of that book had far 
more to do with that than Steve's writing, which rocked on toast as always.
         I also have to give major props to the Listserver folks here, too. 
I went back into the archives and checked out all the (really good) 
questions people asked about that AB over the years, and I took pains to 
see they were answered in print in LS. Old-timers probably know them 
already, but I addressed "Do cards appear in their hands?", "Can they hex 
cannons?" and all the Usual Suspects.

>   I was one of those that cried out for a revision of
>the Hexslinger a while back and so am pleased that it's finally going
>to get some attention.  I have done my own tweaking of the AB (but
>never reached a conclusion that I was happy with) so I really am
>interested to see what direction you have taken with this (but
>generally as long as it's as further away from the huckster I won't
>mind.)

         I think I can boil the revison down to three points:
1) The name--no more confusion!
2) The Hexes--some additions (like Acoustic Shadow) and a LOT of tweaks. 
(With D20 Versions of all--see? I don't hate D20!;-))
3) Attitude. We are told that Doc Holliday--melancholy, terminally ill 
Holliday--was the first of their kind. The Shootist is now much more 
reflective of Doc's personality, and I think grapples more closely with the 
issue of "What if you really WERE the deadliest gunslinger of all?"

>I was also wondering how PEG were going to balance "the Agency" gizmos
>in Lonestars without making another AB (as it was announced that there
>would be no more - and to be honest it wouldn't have really fitted with
>the whole Texas Ranger business) - however should have thought of
>reworking an older one :)

         There will be no more ABs in the sense of one getting a whole new 
set of mechanics. With the Shootist, I hope to show that it's more than 
possible to tweak the existing ones into something that seems new...sort of 
like "sub-classes", if you will. (BTW, I'm working on another such 
"sub-class" for Epitaph #5, but more on that later.)

>Like the idea of the wrestling moves - is this similar idea to those
>written in the BE:TN book?

         Yes, for sake of consistency, if nothing else.

>   Those I thought were a good idea - but some
>were very impractical, i.e. it's fine to spend 3 actions to do a
>piledriver on your opponent when they are unresisting and it's all been
>scripted out - but it's another to use a 3 action maneuver in combat.

         I agree 3 is impractical, but I did make the Stunner a two-card 
manuever, just for game-balance sake.

         What? You want to do the Stunner in D20? What? The WOTC House 
System? What? The OGL Engine? What? That's covered in the book, and that's 
the bottom line...(etc., etc.)

>Will continue to wait LS with baited breath..

         Thanks for your interest!

Deo Vindice,
Mr. Christopher L. McGlothlin, M.Ed.

Freelance RPG Writer At-Large
Moderator of the New Gamers Order Listserver
Southern by the Grace of God