Re: situational question, Oscar (again) and a wargamer's pitch on HW combat

From: Roderick and Ellen Robertson <rjremr_at_...>
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 16:04:27 -0800


> As was just posted in the Digest, Gonn Orta has "Large 5w5".
>
> Could this be used as a defense in the sense of "ignore puny attacker"?

Depends on how puny the attacker is, of course, but Gonn Orta can basically ignore anyone who has less than w4, and can't be harmed by anyone with less than w3 (because of bumps). This might actually be a good place to use a Bump-Down - "Okay, you try to jump over GO, your Great Leap is 15w3, so you're bumped down two levels. You have a 5% chance of a Success..."

>
> As a Narrator, could you then give an attacker a major edge - on the
> order of a bump-up - because said Giant is practically impossible to
> miss?

It depends on what the attacker is trying to do. Is he just trying to hit GO? or is he trying to *harm* him?

> In regards the somewhat fanciful nature of HW combat, I'm finding
> myself roughly agreeing with Michael Cule. I prefer a more
> simulationist combat, rather than a "movielike" combat. But I think
> that with enough tweaking, the HW combat rules could be made to suit
> even grognards.
> For example, one might apply the rule that AP losses MUST be taken as
> wounds. I think that would lead to a "wearing down" of combatants that
> feels more realistic. Possibly requiring a minimum bid of 5 or even 6
> AP would FORCE combats to be more nasty, brutish, and short. Forcing
> each combatant to accumulate d6 AP's in "fatigue" (used as a penalty
> for any subsequent contest without rest) for each bid might do the
> same, so even a winning combatant of a long fight WOULD seek to rest
> and recouperate.

I'm not going to tell you that these ideas are heretical, but I won't be using 'em.

Roderick

Powered by hypermail