As long as we are talking about extended contests, I have a question about neutral parties.
I love the idea of "slow-burn" extended contests, where you make maybe one move a session, used as a way to track something.
The example given in the book is the courtship of a princess, IIRC. Before the Karse game withered on the vine, I had started just such a slow burn contest involved in one of my players trying to convince the Trade Houses to follow his strategies for dealing with the Lunars.
Here's the question. He is trying to show them he should be in charge, and so his bids are based on actions and arguments that he presents. They can resist with something like "Stuck in their ways", "Greedy", "Political cowards", whatever.
But on their turn, what do they bid with? They aren't actively resisting him, they are just reluctant to be convinced or stick their neck out. I'd do it as a simple contest, but the whole "making or losing headway" aspect of an extended contest felt right here.
I suppose I could give him an opponent arguing a different course of action, but the only person who fit dramatically was actually arguing a third option. (So there was my Merchant arguing option A, another arguing option B, and the council which mostly wanted to do C - preserve the status quo.) In that case I could just make it a fight between A and B, although they for the most part aren't trying to attack each other, but convince the council. (This has always been a bit of a question I have concerning "debates" as extended contests. If you aren't trying to convince each other, who is resisting what with what?)
LC
Powered by hypermail