On Wednesday, December 10, 2003, at 07:15AM, Mike Holmes <homeydont_at_...> wrote:
>>From: "Nicolas Hughes" <nicolas.hughes_at_...>
>
>>By driving it to -22AP in the process you may get to give it a Homely 2w
>>ability, which can be used in many ways - including augmenting your Placate
>>Nagging Wife ability.
>
>The problem with this all is that the end result range has nothing to do
>with either the Ability of the character attempting the task, nor with the
>Resistance of the task. And worse, it adds a whole additional system that
>seems unneccessary. I agree that there seem to be two sorts of successes
>going on. But I think that part of this whole alternate system is to get rid
>of that fact. Instead there 's only one sort of success, measured either by
>mechanical methods, or with the Complete Defeat, as mentioned in my posts to
>Simon, as an extension of that spectrum.
The original proposal for this system based the level of the flaw on an ability of the winner that was not the ability used (Strong for instance, when you won using Mace Combat). I thought that was an interesting approach. I would leave it general and say the narrator chooses the ability (of the winner or the loser) that seems most appropriate to base the flaw on.
If I remember correctly, your idea is that this system would never be applied to Complete Victories, as they imply a permanent end to the conflict. Is that right?
I have a problem with Nicolas' system, which is that it's only applicable to extended contests. We need a system based on the defeat level so that it is equally applicable to simple and extended contests.
Michael Bowman
Powered by hypermail