Re: HW FAQ, bidding questions

From: Alexandre Lanciani <alexanl_at_...>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:04:42 +0200

Steve Lieb
> One thing I've considered is to also use certain minimum bids (plus a
> handicap) for special tricks, that possibly only skilled users would
> attempt (talking about combat specifically).
[snip example]
> Does this make sense? What are the ramifications of this?

        Indeed when I describe the results of an exchange I get often carried away by drama, so that fighters get knocked down on the edge of cliffs or disarmed.

        The ramifications of this are that if a combatant is disarmed as a consequence of dramatization, next exchange he will have to use another ability, so maybe he lost more than just the AP. If he is knocked down, his foe may claim a modifier or an edge, etc.

        But AP are supposed to reflect the flux of the fight. Frex, if the character gets disarmed but is high on AP, then the weapon isn't far away, or maybe there's another sword close at hand. So he bets his AP, tumbles to the sword (scores a success) and gets up, with the blade thrust forward to turn the villain's charge into a stumbling fight for balance.

        I think that with HW, players (on both sides of the screen) should let themselves be pulled by the flow of events, described consistently with current APs scores and bids, and be prepared to give modifiers, edges and/or handicaps as the narrated situation requires, even though the relative advantage of the winning character should be represented by his higher APs.

        So, do we give (generalized) modifiers or do we stuff everything into AP?

        What have I said? Don't know, but I'm (fairly) sure everything is IMHO.

	A carried Alex.

Powered by hypermail