Which has been addressed in HQ2, in a variety of ways. (Also, there are ways to do the "running out of resources" version by making the resources question orthogonal to the contest itself. i.e. - you have three magic acorns, if you use one in a contest, it is used up.)
>
> One is the basic variability of results and the need to use hero
> points to get results which means you are spending your experience
> points. That is the same problem I had in TORG.
>
There does seem to be a deliberate choice by the mechanics to favour marginal and minor victories. I have wondered more than once exactly what the logic behind that is. As for HP being both experience and in-game currency, I go back and forth on whether or not I like that.
>
> However, I was re-reading the contest rules and may have had an epiphany.
>
> In the first edition HQ you could, in an extended contest, exchange 7
> AP taken for a hurt. Now a hurt in 2nd edition gives -3 rather than -1
> to related abilities and so is, in essence, equivalent to 21 AP which
> is close to a mastery worth of AP. What about, when you resolve a
> contest, you are able to bump the result at the expense of taking a hurt?
>
It's a suggestion repeatedly made in the past, even in first edition. If you think about it, it is a variation on the costly success idea currently in the rules.
>
> That would make sense to me, being so engaged in getting the result
> that you push it such that you come out of the exchange hurt. That
> would also provide the player with more control in the game without
> having to spend experience.
>
I really don't think it's likely to break the game or anything. I'd say that if it adds dramatic punch to the scene, then it seems entirely appropriate. I'd probably not make it an option on every contest, though. One question that does spring to mind is whether or not it is limited to the winner. In other words, if the player takes a marginal defeat, can they bump it to a minor defeat to gain a marginal victory?
LC
Powered by hypermail