> wrote:
> >
> > As to provoking someone into making a large bid, surely it's just
> as good to
> > make a large bid yourself.
> >
> From a descriptive point of view, it's completely different. Making
> a large bid yourself is doing something risky, taunting your opponent
> to do so is forcing him into doing so ("Enraged by your insults the
> Uroxi throws away his shield and aims a two handed blow at your head"
> - Rolls dice, spend hero point - "... allowing you duck inside his
> reach and bury your sword in his chest").
IMO it's a matter of how much the Narrator is letting the players do the descriptions. Why couldn't a player describe a bet from his foe's POV? After all if the Uroxi is doing an all-out attack bringing down his great axe upon your head, while all your friends are already wondering how you'd look like sliced in two, surely you are risking very much, aren't you?
If his description is cool, and coherent with the setting's integrity (e.g. the character has a high taunt ability and his foe is very proud), perhaps a Narrator shouldn't care if it looks rather like a Narrator's description (because it involves not only the player character declared intentions but also non player characters'). After all one of HW's greatest assets is IMO the players' involvement in the storytelling.
Would this be pushing this flexibility too far, turning a roleplaying game in a collective storytelling (supposing that these distinctions make sense)?
Cheers, A raving Alex.
Powered by hypermail