This opens a whole other can of worms, when does the effect of an extended contest take effect. I tend to go with the view that its all a bit open to interpretation until the end of the contest at which point participants start noticing those wounds they picked up along the way etc. You generally know if you are getting the upper hand or not but the finer details are lost in the melee, this gives a lot of for narrative manouvre although it certainly can feel a bit uncomfortable when still adjusting from more "crunchy" game systems.
>("The Sword
Generally I would be reluctant to narrate anything as definite as wounds or death part way through an extended contest because something might happen to mitigate it. The Death strike of a Humakti Sword is one of the exceptions, once its happened its happened and you would need some serious mojo to undo it - it is special and fearsome precisely because you can "win" a contest and still have half your friends dead. In the case of special stuff like this either someone declares their AP lend as soon as they get a clue of what is happening ("sensing the death magic I use my Confound Pagan God to prevent his deathly gaze") or they run the risk of being too late to help. More mundane stuff I think you can play a little more fast and loose, the last minute intervention that saves a hero's friend from being run through is such a heroic staple that forbidding it would be rather a pity IMO.
It is certainly possible to play so that each contest is seperate and off-the-cuff intervention not allowed but I think this leads to the "its his turn, I'll just sit here and doodle and pay no attention" syndrome. Keeping players interested at all times is such a worthwhile goal[1] that playing a little fast and loose and narrating around the consequences seems like a small price to pay.
[1] Perhaps we just have short attention spans.
-- Nic
Powered by hypermail