> > 4. (The big one to my mind.) What has "action type" got to do with a
> > contest anyway? They're about resolving conflicting *GOALS* not *actions*.
>
>And to (try to) come to the crux of the matter: what if the goal changes?
Depends. How's that for clarity?
Okay, we're in the middle of a contest, and one side decides to change
goals. (Both sides changing goals at the same moment seems too unlikely to
be worth considering...) This leaves us with a few possiblities :
- The other side does not object to the new goal, presumably because the
new goal does not interfere with their own goal. In this case, the contest
is over. ("The guy turns and runs away." "Okay, I let him go.")
- The other side objects to the new goal. In this case, the contest
continues, but probably with new abilities. ("The guy turns and runs away."
"I draw my bow and shoot him in the back.")
- The new goal forces the other side to change their goal too. Harder to
come up with simple examples here, but I accept this is possible. This case
splits into two - the new goals aren't opposed ("The guy turns and runs
away." "He'll alert the guard! Let's get out of here before they arrive!")
and the new goals are opposed (er, example missing - I'm sure Alex will
think of one...). In the first case, that's form 1 again.
The only interesting case is where one side changes goals, the other side
thus being forced to choose a new goal, but these two goals are opposed. In
that case, I'd generally tend to believe the contest continues. There are a
number of reasons for this :
- The characters involved are the same, as is their opposition.
- One side will have gained an advantage in the previous contest. If you
start a new contest, that advantage is either lost, or you have to
introduce extra rules to represent that advantage. I don't like extra rules...
- The previous contest was an extended contest, presumably for dramatic
reasons. What of the new one? If it's also extended, you can end up with a
large number of big contests, which seems clumsy to me. ("Hey, I'm bored of
this extended contest - let's start another one!") If it's simple, you lose
the (supposed) drama of an extended contest - it could be a bit of a let
down. Worse, we already have rules for allowing a simple contest to
interrupt an extended contest. So if you're going to switch to a simple
contest, either make it an unrelated action, or continue the current
contest, but insist on a bid that will end the contest anyway.
- It breaks the basic theory of HQ that consequences are only worked out
when a contest ends. If contests don't end, no consequences!
In general, I reckon its not a good idea to allow the loser of a contest to
start a new one until "time passes". An example I think seems fine,
however, would be : "You know that guy you let run away half an hour ago?"
"Yeah?" "Well, he's back, and he brought his mates..."
Cheers,
Graham