Re: Re: Argument overridden

From: Dave Camoirano <DaveCamo_at_...>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 07:20:49 -0500


Hi!

On Monday, October 27, 2003, at 02:48 AM, Paul Andrew King wrote:

> >On Sunday, October 26, 2003, at 04:42  PM, Paul Andrew King wrote:
> >
> >>  >  > >I do not see him changing tack as "ignoring the psychological
> >>  damage" -
> >>  >>  >more on this in a moment.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>Again it is not the issue of "changing tack" as the nature of the
> >>  >>change.  The way I see it the most likely situation is the
> >>  >>psychological equivalent of being "thrown to the floor".  He's
> got to
> >>  >>recover from that before going on an all-out attack.
> >>  >
> >>  >Based on what? There has been no description of a specific effect
> that
> >>  >would be equivalent to "thrown to the floor". What has the trooper
> >>  done
> >>  >that would force the GM to make this interpretation?
> >>
> >>  Do I have ot keep repeating this ?  Based on how the attack is
> >>  supposed to work.
> >
> >And how is the attack "supposed to work"?

>

> In a real game I would ask for this information from the player - and
> in a contest between player characters get input from both players.
> As we don't have that for the purposes of this discussion I am
> assuming that it is supposed to undermine the target's will to resist.
> Feel free to disagree with the opinion, like I've said I have
> problems with the idea myself.

Then I don't see why you're arguing. You're basing your argument on information that doesn't exist. Based on the information we know (the cavalry guy is down to 8 AP), there's no reason to restrict him from charging across the bridge in a contest where the goal is to get to the other side. If we knew he was thrown from his horse for some reason then I'd be right with you. How could he charge across on his horse if he's not *on* his horse?

But even assuming that it is supposed to undermine the target's will to resist, it *doesn't* limit the target's choice of action. The target will no longer resist once his AP have fallen to 0. Given only the fact that he's down to 8 AP means that he's close to conceding to the other guy and that's all. Being down to 8 AP means nothing else. Period. Other factors may limit his actions but not the fact that he only has 8 AP. If the cavalry guy is not a PC or major NPC, it would restrict his maximum bit to 8 but even that should not restrict his action otherwise since a bid should be commensurate with his actions via percentage (for example, "If you charge across the bridge, you must bid at least half your AP"). See the 'Sample AP Bids' chart on page 68 of HQ. If the character is a PC, you might even require a desperation stake.

As far as I know, however, there's nothing in the rules that limit your choice of action based purely on current AP, regardless of the stated goal. If there is, please let me know where.

Of course, YGWV and that's fine.

Camo

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Powered by hypermail