Re: Digest Number 1824

From: Rob <robert_m_davis_at_...>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:13:17 -0000

Not so.

> Every context could (can? will?) becomes
> an exercise in trying to convince the other players and the GM
> what skills and augments apply. Then, after the roll, there is
> still a huge judgement call in how the results apply.

The narrator should, IMO, always ask what the players intent is. Even if you assume he wants to kill the broo, he should be asked.

> Did she 'save her children' by killling the raiders, driving
them
> off, chasing them away after they started the sted burning and
> stole the cattle, or even by dying while seeing the youngest
carried
> off to be sold into slavery (still alive!). Obviously level of
victory is
> one input into figuring out what should happen. But if the goal
is
> ambiguous ('save my children'), there is a lot of room for after
the
> fact arguing.

If its save my children, how can that be construed ambiguous? A success is the kids are saved. The raiders are driven off. Even on a complete defeat, at the narrators option. There is no debate.

Just be clear about the desired outcome and the game flows. Sometimes the level of victory or defeat is irrelevant - its an either or. It depends how much narrative weight that contest has, and the desired detail.

Regards
Rob

>
> Doug

Powered by hypermail