If the action was diving over a hedge and driving aspear into the eye of a wyvern then the GM would want to come to some agreement over the size of the AP bid and what would be the most appropriate skill to use.
I just wanted to point out that a high AP bid in this case shouldn't be ruled out because the GM thought that there should first be a small bid to overcome the obstacle of the hedge.
-----Original Message----- From: simon_hibbs2 [mailto:simon.hibbs_at_...] Sent: Thu 30/10/2003 16:11 To: HeroQuest-rules_at_yahoogroups.com Cc: Subject: Re: Implicit and explicit factors in Extended Contests
> As for forbidding low bids in this example you would seem to say
>that it is OK to rule out high bids. The proposed action could
>win the contest by jumping the obstacle and chopping off the
>beasts head. The way you suggest would rule that out.
I think it's reasonable to make judgement calls on how high or low a bid should be based on the riskiness of the character's stated action. For example: "I bash at his shield and weapon a bit to see how well he responds to my attack - I bid desperation stakes, 30 APs!" Is clearly about as bad a combination of stated intent and bidding as you can get. IMHO tyhere's nothing wrong with providing strong, or in some cases even mandatory guidance on appropriate AP bids. Simon Hibbs ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/7tRolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To Post a message, send it to: HeroQuest-rules_at_... To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: HeroQuest-rules-unsubscribe_at_... To Complain constructively please email me at steve_at_....
Powered by hypermail