At least in this instance we don't, I presume, have the issue of different resistances per spear... (Except that magical spears resist more? Hrm.)
> It would be mad to pit all the character's balance abilities
> directly against each other - they're not actualy doing anything
> to each other, so why would you want to?
[and later]
> Admittedly in many situations in an actual game if the character
> end up in a jumping contest with an NPC I'll run it as a direct
> contest against each other using their best Jumping ability.
I must admit I'm not seeing the distinction between what's mad, and what commonly occurs. Would it be 'mad' to 'run' a running contest as, well, a running contest? As opposed to two separate tests against the distance's resistance. Exactly the same issue applies.
> This is just a convenience issue though. As soon as one of the
> characters starts using their creativity, and uses any fun
> foibles of their ability to gain an edge by making the contest
> more specific, I'd be crazy, not to say very unpopular, to not
> take that into account in deciding how to run it.
This seems a little uncomfortable to me. It seems to say that you agree there is a issue here, but you feel you're able to 'manage' it. Doesn't this rather gloss over what's actually happening in the game world? And doesn't it lead to precisely the disjunct I was describing, if you find yourself in a situation where the two possible mechanisms give palpably different results, especially where the situation changes in some way, after the initial choice of a mechanic? (Say, half way through an EC.)
Powered by hypermail