Re: Boring Combat

From: David Cake <dave_at_...>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:43:55 +0800


>Part of the problem is that Jonas wants to see combat as a series of blows who
>the other is defending against, and that if the "attacker" loses AP it is
>because he stumbled.

        Yep. Jonas wants RQ attack/defend exchanges.

>That is not at all how I see it. I see each exchange in a round as
>an interplay
>between the contestants, and if the "attacker" loses AP, that could be because
>the "defender" kicked him in some unmentionable part.

	Me too.
	I find the idea that if the attacker loses in an exchange 
(which happens very often), they stumble etc and this has nothing to do with the opponents weapons, very odd. Would lead to descriptions with a large number of very clumsy sounding warriors. I prefer to leave stumbling and other 'shoot self in foot' behaviours to Fumbles.
	Cheers
		David

Powered by hypermail