Re: AP's and switching in combat

From: Andrew Dawson <asmpd_at_...>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 01:14:28 -0500

At 08:37 PM 03/25/2000 -0800, you wrote:
>Oscar can still win (assuming he isn't splattered in the first strike), if
>his wit can disturb/confuse/demoralize the troll. Oscar can use any defense
>he wishes, not just his rapier wit - so if he has dodge, or scamper, or
>whatever, he can "defend" with that, while still hurling taunts at the troll
>as his "attack". An example - Cyrano de Bergerac's duel with the fellow
>outside the theater: I'd run it as a contest of Cyrano's Wit (augmented by
>his Fencing) against the poor fellow's Fencing. Cyrano sets the stakes at
>the beginning of the scene - "I will compose a poem" - and proceeds to
>demolish the fellow both physically and mentally. Cyrano's defense is his
>fencing ability, not his wit.

I understand what you are trying to do here and I agree, but I have some more questions on this situation:

  1. Cyrano is the Actor and attacks with his Rapier Wit. Can the troll defend with his Great Maul at a huge improvisational modifier? (Reasoning: The troll intends to clobber this guy, not listen to him.)
  2. Same situation: At the metagame level, Cyrano's player should stake a lot of AP on this first exchange in order to deplete the troll rapidly. Do you think that this is okay or do you see a limiting factor that the Narrator could apply?
  3. Same situation: The limiting factor that I can think of is that a large AP stake means a large risk. Since Cyrano is presumably defending with Fencing and attacking with Wit, I can see a negative improvisational modifier being added to the next Fencing defense to simulate the risk taken in order to stake a large number of AP staked in the previous Wit attack (maybe Cyrano throws his arms wide apart in order to punctuate his point and has to scramble to bring his foil back in line for defense). Does this sound right to you or do you have a better idea?
  4. Same situation: Cyrano has brought the troll down to negative AP. The troll obviously isn't physically hurt. How would you, as Narrator, describe why the troll isn't fighting anymore? (I'm dubious of the "the troll is shamed and confused explanation by what he regards as your irrelevant yammering" explanation and there aren't always going to be troll mothers around to hold back the troll.)
  5. General thought: It has already been discussed that in order for Oscar/Cyrano/whoever to use Rapier Wit, he must have skills in Uz Culture, Uz Language, etc. There doesn't seem to be a mechanic on hand to apply these handicaps. Should the Narrator determine them by rolling on the Augmentation Resistance Chart, has there been any thought about determining an Edge or Handicap from a raw ability score, or is the Narrator supposed to wing this? If the last option, do you have any helpful guidelines?
  6. Same thought: Cyrano's Rapier Wit score could be limited to his ability in Uz culture. This type of mechanic doesn't seem to exist yet in Hero Wars. Is this with or against the spirit of the rules?
  7. General thought: Maybe trolls are naturally resistant to human wit and troll wit is incomprehensible to humans (maybe is involves eating things that humans can't eat while generating sonar clicks). In this case, it seems that Cyrano's Rapier Wit can't work on trolls. Is this an acceptable Hero Wars ruling?
  8. Same thought: Maybe trolls aren't entirely immune to human wit but some unique ability of theirs like the level of the highest ability in the Uz culture keyword is applied to a human's Wit attack as a handicap. Is this ruling more true to Hero Wars canon?
  9. Same thought: If trolls are naturally immune or resistant to human wit, then that would explain why this is such a difficult (and possibly inappropriate) example.


Powered by hypermail