>Right, but the loss of the spear had nothing to do with the AP loss;
>the AP loss indicates how much of a problem it really was. The loss
>of the spear was purely a result of the narrative.
The loss of the spear is also irrelevant to the game mechanics. If the vampire loses its exchange,Harstal could easily get his spear again (he's now in a better relative position). Or he could state that his action is to wrench his spear back out; the AP logic would be the same.
Andrew
>As I understand it, actual physical changes to the situation (injury, loss
>of weapon, etc.) should only happen if someone crosses 0 AP and/or fumbles.
>Am I mistaken?
Irreparable physical damage to a person, yes. But I don't see any problem leaving a swathe of broken furniture, slashed up clothing, etc. in the wake of a combat.
>if he'd actually dropped his spear, he'd need to either (a) take an
>'unrelated action' to get the spear back,
I don't think it necessarily has to be an unrelated action. It's up to the Narrator and the description. As Mike said, most players would try to pull it back out, and this is arguably a continuation of the battle -- especially since success plausibly harms the vampire's situation. (If Harstal were instead going to try to fit his spare spearhead to his spare staff, that would more obviously be an unrelated action.)
-- David Dunham dunham_at_... Glorantha/HW/RQ page: http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
Powered by hypermail