>From: Brian Curley <bkcurley_at_...>
>
>Um... yeah, I know this. My question was specifically on what happens
>when someone *joins* a group extended contest that's *already under
>way*.
Again, I answered this - they go right when the player interjects and says the character goes. I mean, let's say that PC A is attacked by NPC Enemy B, and PC C is on a hill a couple of hundred yards away. B is intent on killing A, so a contest ensues. The GM asks if C wants to be in on the contest. Now C could say yes and be involved right then and there. In which case, his round can be said to occur in AP total.
But let's say he doesn't decide to join in right then. But, then B goes and gets a good result, then A goes, and gets a bad result and, as A is in trouble, C decides he wants to enter in on the side of A, with the same goal, but with his own pool (so he's not just augmenting). His first round occurs right then and there. So then the order goes CBACBA, etc until B's pool is down to zero, or A and C's pool is down to zero.
What's C's first action? Why to close the distance to the battle, of course.
Time and distance have nothing to do with who is involved in a contest. Only narrator decision of who's involved (often, in practice, informed by player intents). We've had extended contests involving my character trying to figure out that another PC was a murderer, in which neither character knew who the other was - in fact his character wasn't origially even on to the fact that my character was searching for him.
BTW, yes, using the rule that says that the player gets to go when he says gives players an incentive to start contests, in that if they instgate them, they get to go first. I'd call this a feature, not a bug, however. It also happens to be realistic.
>Each PC has their APs determined when they act, or when they have to
>resist.
I'd state it as the characters have their AP determined when they are declared to be in the contest.
>Since the Broo in my example are attacking from surprise, they
>choose their targets (i.e. four of the PCs, since they don't want to try
>attacking multiple defenders). Only those four PCs attacked have the AP
>values determined. The remaining two do not.
You're saying that they're somehow not in the contest. That the boo don't ever intend to turn on these other characters? Or...if the other characters don't join in, that you'd have the broo start another contest against them after the first had ended?
It's all one big contest. If the PCs in question have a goal in that contest, then they're in the contest from the start.
>My question is, when the surprise round is over,
I know you're not saying that there's some mechanical thing as a surprise round, but you're making it sound like there has to be some specific mechanical result of the event. The only mechanical result of surprise might be a modifier, if you think it's warranted (no different than every situation). That, and, as the rules say, it means they go first.
>how do you determine when those two PCs act
>since their AP values have not been set?
Again, if, in fact, the PCs in question really don't have a goal in the contest, and if the broo really don't include in their goal killing the other PCs, then if a player changes his mind and gets his character into the fight, then he joins in right when he says he wants to join. I'd say as soon as the other PCs have had their turn (hard to imagine otherwise uncommitted PCs becoming committed before those committed had a chance to do anything). Just do what makes sense.
>Our players must be of different breeds, because mine always want to
>roll their own dice instead of choosing one person to roll for them. But
>if I could convince them to go with your method, it would really
>streamline group extended contests.
Well, to be clear, I actually rarely have situations in which this sort of situation can occur. That is, where all of the characters are together, and all invested in the contest. That's in part because we don't do "party play." But, actually, where there are multiple PCs, often they do select to be in different groups. Often because they have very different goals for the contest.
For instance in one fight I recall, one PC was determined to kill the opposition, and lead two others also so interested, whereas a fourth PC just wanted to run for it. So he got his own pool.
But, here's the thing - if you ask in terms of who's supporting what goal, players tend to be more OK with supporting one team or another. Or that's been my experience. Just telling them that it's an option for each character to augment another instead of being a separate actor in the contest doesn't usually get them to buy in.
It's the difference between joining a team, as opposed to just supporting one character. In play the teams tend to work together to come up with the descriptions. They're not, "With the help of other's Ragnar lunges to kill the first broo" as round declarations, it's more like:
Player A (with main character on team): "My character swings his sword in a wide arc attempting to ensuring that the broo cannot advance." Player B (with augmenting or lending character on team): "Yeah, while my character lunges out and strikes the one that looks most like the leader!" Narrator: "OK, that sounds about like a 25 AP bid..."
>I still wonder if there's an "by the book" way of handling this that
>I've just been missing.
Er, this is all "by the book." As I mentioned. At least it sticks as close to the rules as any other interpretation of them I've seen. I tend to be a stickler for the book (with certain specific well-defined exceptions). Actually by one reading characters can't get into other's extended contests after they start. But it's more fun to read it as allowing late entries as you're suggesting, and with the rules as I'm describing them.
BTW, I'm guessing you live in Madison... if so, we could maybe get together at some point and play together (I'm in Milwaukee). Would probably allow me to more easily demonstrate what I'm talking about.
Mike
Powered by hypermail