Re: 'Simulationist' Wound/Combat system for HW?

From: Ian Cooper <ian_hammond_cooper_at_...>
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 14:10:50 -0000


In case it helps I have been involved in a similar discussion over at rpg.net. For time constraints, I'll just repost a comment Imade there and add the addage:

Now on to the comment on rpg.net (In the Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser thread)

"First the player describes the kind of action they are taking, everything from 'wait for an opening', through 'run him through', to 'attack wildly without regard to the risk to myself'. Actually, those are dry, but context helps. What is important is not the description of what I am doing, but the description of the risk I am taking. The higher the risk, the greater the percentage of my current Action Points I spend. There is both a greater risk that if it goes wrong I will end up defeated, and a greater chance, if it goes right that you will be defeated. Then we roll. From the results, we determine what happened: "You force him back, and his arms weakened under your flurry of blows "or "You stabbed him with the sword he's down." The emphasis for the description is on the actor, not the defender. If a player is defending we share describing the results, consensus is usually easy. The trick is to go for showy, but nonspecific  results: wounds can bleed a lot, fatigue can set in, you can see stars, and your vision can be blurred. But don't conclude anything too specific about how bad the wound or injury was because the final state is not determined until the contest ends avoid suggesting final injuries or results until one side or the other is defeated.

The only time we ever get ourselves in a slight pickle is when our descriptions `count somebody out' before the end of the conflict. Remember you can trade 7AP for a wound if you want a particular effect in game, and you can use the grievous wound option for dramatic duels. With practice its easy."

Powered by hypermail