Re: Modelling EC consequences

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_...>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 20:38:40 +0100 (BST)

Charles:
> One possible way to think of this. If in the case where the archer
> cannot reasonably be injured, think of another major defeat. Maybe he
> stepped out of line and his captain no longer trusts him. Or maybe he
> missed so badly that all of his comrades believe that he could not hit
> a barn door at close range.

Indeed, good point. Maybe not worth repeating nine times, but a good point. ;-)

I deal with the "issue" in a number of ways -- or at least would consider doing so, as seemed appropriate. I can't say it's come up so often as to facilitate extensive playtesting on the subject...

  1. Assess ability penalties, as per the table for physical consequences, on the grounds of "demoralisation", etc.
  2. Assess penalties as above, but only on the ability being used in the contest, or "related" abilities according to some criterion. Or thus, but proportionately increased on some ad hoc basis.
  3. "Narrative consequences", aka "bad stuff happens", aka "karmic AP". Unfortunate things happen that aren't necessarily as the direct result as the opponent's actions, but that make sense in the overall narrative.
  4. Ignore them. Under-used, this one... Technically you should of course only be using an EC for "important" events, and any contest at all for significant ones. But sometimes it can seem not-worth-the-bother for any real difference it would make to the story, and was it that 'important' a contest anyway? If the archer (say) is "supposed to" take Minor consequences, but it seems unnecessary, a bother to work out, and to subtract more from the story than it adds, just skip it.

Cheers,
Alex.

Powered by hypermail