[Hi Benedict]
Unless the players asks: "How did he do that? Can I make the same
thing myself (provided my hero is a devotee/disciple?"
(snipped sensible explanations)
> In fact, you don't need special rules to describe this situation,
the
> normal contest rules will do. Imagine the objective of your NPC was
to
> escape Krasht unharmed, and Krasht had the objective of consuming
the
> NPC forever. Krasht would need a complete victory to consume the
NPC
> forever, since that is a permanent effect, equivalent to death. Any
kind
> of victory by Krasht corresponds to the NPC NOT getting away
unharmed
> (because the NPC had that as their objective, and victory by Krasht
> means defeat for the NPC). Therefore any kind of victory by Krasht,
> short of a complete victory, means that the NPC escapes, but is
injured
> in some way, with the degree of victory determining the severity of
the
> wounding. The outcome you want seems to correspond to a major
defeat for
> the NPC.
You sure? Mmmmhh It could be. I'd like the NPC to lose one of his affinity and not being injured/dying. Maybe I could explain that it is not the outcome of the technique he used, but of Krarsht power of eating (he beats her by surviving and saving the heroes, but she sucks part of his power anyway).
> But what about the fact that the NPC was very close to defeat but
then
> escaped? You could just decide that's the narrative corresponding
to the
> defeat level produced by the rules. Alternatively, the description
fits
> a contest in which the NPC was facing complete defeat, used a Final
> Action to try and escape, but won only enough APs to reduce the
deficit
> rather than eliminate it entirely.
Right. I could explain it that way, I think. What I care for is the scene being very climactic and the rulesy explanation being not too much mucked up. I suppose I can achieve this results using these suggestions. Thanks.
Ciao,
Gian
Powered by hypermail