Re: Re: Modelling EC consequences

From: Graham Spearing <graham_at_...>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 16:05:20 +0100

nichughes2001 wrote:

> I probably should not have jumped in as I see this as a bit of a non-
> problem, if you choose not to narrate the ongoing shifts of AP (i.e.
> you declare that none of the opposition have made it to close combat
> even though an archer is on -ve AP) then narrating your way out of
> the hole you have dug is just something you are going to have to
> learn to do. This is generally true for a narrator ignoring the
> actual ongong results of a contest and is not a particular feature of
> archery.

Keep jumping, your contribution is really helpful. My problem is probably down to the embracement of the more free flowing narrative driven nature of Extended Contests. I've played 6 second combat round simulation driven rpgs for much too long. Visualising the action is made easy for you in these systems. Player decisions on actions relate to one or more rounds of action that are handled, mechanistically, by the rules system, along with much shouting and laughing from players. Figures or sketches, also help visualise the action and show relative position, affecting the future decisions of players as the action develops.

If I have you right, I need to throw most of these tired old props away. I need to develop the action in sympathy with the changing balance of the APs. AP bids may also be affected by the developing action. A well run EC will keep these two concerns in perfect symbiosis driving and affecting the narrative flow. This is why I'm scared.

 > Obviously not, all it means is that your opponent succeeded in their  > aims, so the form of the defeat will depend on those aims.

My archer, who's potting away at a distance trying to take out his opponents who are skulking amongst the rocks suddenly, through frustration at getting nowhere (due to penalties because of cover), bids very high and fails again. If the enemy wanted to escape then I'd just say that they wander off shouting insults (probably in an outrageous French accent) as my archer looks on ineffectually. If they wanted to take out the archer I'd say that they rush him and do him in.

Fetchet le vache

Practical help on this sort of issue needs to be made clear in the new HQ rules. I hope to test them at Convulsion.



"Does the celestial badger get a +2 for outflanking?"
Tom Zunder, DMing D&D, 20/05/2002

Powered by hypermail