I was using "loss" in a general sense. I don't think limiting all physical changes to the end of the contest makes sense. Physical changes stemming from the goal? Yes, unless taking a wound. Physical changes that are simply steps to achieving the goal, no. For example, if I'm trying to win a duel (dueling until either party surrenders), I may try to disarm my foe. I may succeed in my disarm, but that may not necessarily win me the contest. It all depends on how much spunk my opponent has. My goal is to get my opponent to surrender, not to disarm him. My disarming him is simplying going to serve in convincing him the wisdom of surrender.
I would make the actual outcome of the action dependent on the relative level of success of the exchange.
> So in this hypothetical Rurik v. Dracula fight, if Rurik
> loses an exchange but doesn't fumble or drop below 0 AP, the
narrative
> result should be something like "You almost lose your grip on your
spear",
> not "you lose the spear".
Well, in either case, the spear is stuck in the vampire. Most every player that I know, if they weren't completely demoralized, would most likely make their next action "I pull my spear back out."
> In David's example, I assume he meant something like "Your spear is
stuck in
> the vampire but you're still holding on to it", so Rurik's next
action
> starts from a disadvantaged position--the loss of 10 AP represents
the fact
> that Rurik needs to pull the spear out before he can do anything.
No, he can just leave the spear there.
> (Whereas
> if he'd actually dropped his spear, he'd need to either (a) take an
> 'unrelated action' to get the spear back, or (b) switch to some
other
> skill.)
He can choose those whether it's stuck in the vampire or lying on the floor. The key is that the narrative description is whatever flows best (as long as you don't do anything overtly permanent until the end of the contest).
> Of course, I've never actually played the game...
What are you waiting for, man?
Mike Ryan
Powered by hypermail