> So if I state that my goal is to 'shoot arrows into my enemy', then
> select archery to attain that goal, could my enemy select an action
> to prevent my shooting arrows as a means to stop me attaining my
> goal. Eg a oakfed practitioner could use fire magic to consume the
> attackers arrows before he fires the arrows. ONe would use Archery
> and the other a 'Consuming Fire' spirit.
You're using the right approach, this is exactly how HQ is supposed to work, but what ability uses are appropriate is a question that depends on your point of view. In this particular case, I think trying to burn up the arrows is going to be very hard, but theorieticaly possible. They're small targets far away, so you'll suffer ranged magic penalties. Also if you missjudge it you'll end up riddled with burnign arrows - which could actualy be worse that if they weren't burning in the first place. I'd allow it, but with a stiff appropriateness penalty in addition to the ranged magic penalty.
An Oakfed worshiping hero with suitable huge fire powers should be able to do it though.
> Can you extend this further... eg A Oakfed Shaman attacks a whole
> group with a Bonfire Spirit, his goal being to burn them all. Would
> the group then try to 'prevent the goal'... either all rolling
> individually or making one roll for the group?
I'd use the standard group contest rules, it's just that one of the groups only has a single member.
> I actually quite like the idea of this, but I am worried it might
> end up getting out of hand in what skills could end up being
> compared to each other.
Well, this is where appropriateness comes in.
> 2) The other aspect of this is the use of 'active' magic in a
> defensive role. If you consider an action to be an exchange then
> both sides could fire at each other... I shoot him with arrows vs I
> shoot him with arrows, OR I cast "Burn his body to a cinder" at
him,
> I reply by casting "Stop his heart from beating"... the exchange
and
> rolls would merely represent which one got their effect out first?
> Both actions are "attacking".
Sure you're both attacking, just like in a fast-draw gun fight. I'd just assume that the character that won the exchange got their attack off first, and spoiled their opponent's aim, or concentration. Note that in the rules any exchange can result in the 'active' character suffering a loss just as easily as the deFending player. The only advantage the active players get is that they get to choose their goal and the ability they will use to pursue it. If their opponent has an apropriate strategy to oppose them and a suitable ability at a higher rating, then actualy the defender has the advantage.
Simon Hibbs
Powered by hypermail