Let's see. Some first stabs:
On March 13, 2007 12:23 pm, Graham, Andrew wrote:
> The famous last stand:
> Survival is not the main object, it is giving others the chance to get
> away or what ever.
> So how do you model the contest or is you demise automatic ?
Always a classic. Personally, I will do automatic demise on the "Last Man on the Bridge" scenario if the player wants this to be their chance to go out in a blaze of glory. (And success then being how much time they buy/how many people get past.)
Otherwise, I see one option being any success buys enough time, with level of success indicating how much damage you get. Otherwise, I suppose you can just choose what the various levels mean in terms of time/damage trade off. But since the goal is stalling them, I'd make that the important aspect here.
> or Similarly:
> Playing catch the bullet trying to stop some thing happening where your
> own survival is not the main objective.
> You could succeed and die or succeed and live
My gut instinct on this would be Complete success succeed and be unscathed, Major succeed and live, minor or marginal succeed and die. (or get greviously wounded.)
> Matching "run away from Humakti" vs.. "big nasty sword".
I don't understand this one.
> Cases where the hero wants to protect one or more of there followers
> after the follower has gotten involved in the contest.
> So the hero could die but the follower could live.
That's an interesting one. I don't think I've ever encountered it.
> Or the other way round where a follower wants to lay down there life for
> the hero. So the follower could die but the hero could win.
This strikes me as somewhat similar to the "catch a bullet" scenario above.
LC
Powered by hypermail