Okay, I'm being unclear here. Destroying someone's shield *could* be an AP bid, but it doesn't *have* to be. Depends what's going on, personal preference, etc.
So you could run it as :
"I try to break his shield."
<decide bid, roll dice, adjust AP totals>
[other side] "I see my friend has no shield, so I throw him mine"
<decide size of AP loan, roll dice, adjust AP totals>
or equally :
"I try to break his shield."
<roll unrelated contest, decide whether shield is still usable>
[other side] "I see my friend has no shield, so I throw him mine"
<roll unrelated contest, decide whether shield is caught or not>
Which I would use depends entirely on the situation. If the shield is an unimportant part of the contest, then its an AP bid. If having a shield or not makes a significant difference to the contest's nature, I'd want to know exactly what happens to it, so I'd make it an unrelated contest. The latter case would be a case where I'd already broken his sword, so if I break his shield too he's defenceless and can either run away or surrender. The unrelated contest in this case is because the outcome cuts down the options my opponent has.
>For us this is a key aspect of HW - using a feat can force your
>opponent to rely on a lower skill.
Absolutely - playing to the opponent's weakness is key to the system.
>I would be interested as to what you make of the way we do it.
My impression is that you have a strong preference for making AP bids. I have a strong preference for simple contests. Again, this is a great strength of the system - different styles get equal support, and are equally valid.
Cheers,
Graham
-- Graham Robinson graham_at_... Albion Software Engineering Ltd.
Powered by hypermail