Re: Re: Simple Contest question

From: Graham Robinson <gjr_at_...>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:17:09 +0000 (GMT)


On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 wulfc_at_... wrote:

> It does, thanks. Not sure I agree with all your ideas, but they're
> all comparable to mine :) I like your resolution table particularly,
> but one question: when it says "-3 to next action", do you mean 'next
> action as an actor' or 'next die roll, be it as actor or opponent'?
> This bit, the 'Dazed' result from the standard Simple Contest, was my
> biggest problem. If it has no effect, the contest can drag on for
> ever. If that person loses their next action as an actor, it helps,
> but not much. Losing next action attack or defence is too nasty.
>

I need to clarify that. I don't distinguish 'attack' and 'defence'. That isn't really part of a simple contest. Both sides decide on an action, if they're opposed, you conduct the contest. If you were dazed last round, then you're on a -3 for that roll. I am considering making this rather more dangerous by changing the size of the penalty to the amount by which the marginal victory was won, with edges effecting this.

Cheers,
Graham

-- 
Graham Robinson			The Stableyard - Internet Solutions
gjr_at_...		http://www.thestableyard.net

Powered by hypermail