This is, as usual with Alex, exactly right.
Would the following rules variant be wthin the spirit of the game?
While playing, you mentally split up your SPs into different pools, representing physical agility and skill, tactical advantage, or broken equipment and wounds.
Any description of what's going on has to make sense given those assignments.
So, if I'm at the top of a cliff firing arrows at you below, then I get a big chunk of SPs representing that fact. If I bet that, you can't counter unless you have some ability which works in this situation (e.g. heroic leap, run away, surrender, etc.). If you don't have anything better, you have to bet your bottom-line 'I'm not dead' points.
If you lose these, you are.
Even if you win, you only get to play again next round, until you think of a better plan, or the situation changes.
Similarly, in a court case, some SPs might represent general respect for due process, some the evidence, and some your popularity within the clan. It'd be quite possible to win the case, but to never quite regain the respect you had before the case was brought (as you bet on your popularity early on, and lost, before someone turned up with the vital evidence that swung the case your way...)[1]
I think this would give a lot more flavour than a simple SP number, that always resets to zero after every fight. It still focuses on outcome, not process, but allows a lot more possible outcomes than complete success or utter failure.
The main actual change to the rules would be to get rid of the automatic status points based on skill, instead having some written on the character sheet, and some assigned by the GM based on the situation.
Richard
[1] Any resemblance to a certain real-world court case involving
a cigar is purely coincidental...
- --
Richard Melvin
Powered by hypermail