>>>In my mind it is still the same contest.
>
>I agree with this...
>
>>>I think the whole construct of the
>>>rules falls if you can sidestep them
>>>simply by declaring that you want
>>>to change either the actions or the
>>>goals within the contest.
>
>...but that is nonsense. Are you saying that if two swordsmen start
>fighting one another with the stated object of killing one another, neither
>can change his mind half way through and run away?
No, that’s not what I was saying. My point was that you were in a contest where there were intents on both sides. Both goals and tactics might change during that contest but the contest must be resolved before resetting AP totals.
>*Of course* both sides
>are at liberty to change the actions and/or goals within a contest. Any
>other interpretation is just plain silly. What neither party is entitled
>to do is end the contest prematurely.
Which is the very point I was stating. If an argument dissolves into a fist or knife fight then the AP totals stay the same (in my game) and the end of the contest might have very different consequences than if the contest had remained verbal.
There is a strand of argument that would say that when it turns violent then a new contest should be begun – perhaps with GM assigned penalties to one or both of the parties with new AP totals. In this case the original contest might not ever be resolved. Which in my view would be ending the contest prematurely.
>>>As far as I see it, once you enter a
>>>contest then you have to finish it
>>>and determine the consequences
>>>of that contest before entering a
>>>second one.
>
>Close, but no cigar. It is possible (though clumsy and confusing) to have
>multiple contests occurring simultaneously. Happens to me every day in
>real life...
I’m willing to accept that multiple contests _might_ possibly be done simultaneously – though what happens when might be problematic here – especially if you have multiple opponents engaged in both contests! :-) The GM would have to be a masochist!!!
Anyway – I’ve sworn off this argument except to clear up any misunderstandings of my position! :-)
Powered by hypermail