RE: "Neutral" Parties

From: Mike Holmes <mike_c_holmes_at_...>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 19:23:42 -0600

>From: Lightcastle <light_castle_at_...>
>
>As long as we are talking about extended contests, I have a question about
>neutral parties.

I'm with Paul here, generally, if they aren't opposing you, where's the contest?

But let me get really wishy-washy for a second.

Consider that passive resistance is still resistance.

So if they're really part of the opponent's side, then they're lending the opponent AP, likely. The opponent's bids won't come from the neutral parties, they'll only come from the opponent themselves. The "neutrals" are really just "blockers" in this case for the actual opponent.

That said, often progress against such an opponent really can't be seen as progress overall. That is, they're truely neutral, and just represent some roadblock in the way of getting to a point to launch one of your own bids. Uh, the count has to question all potential suitors for them to even get into the court - not that he wants to prevent anyone from wooing the princess, but it's just a task. In this case, I run these as "unrelated contests." Which do, BTW, take the character's "round" to perform. So it is a positional thing.

Basically look at it closely. Is the NPC aiding the opponent, or just something in the way of setting up the situation so that you can make a certain sort of bid? For the latter, it's just like taking an action to draw a sword in a fight - if you don't take that unrelated action, you can't really bid an action to do anything with the sword, right?

Yeah it's pretty semantic. That is I can rationalize doing many actions like this either way - and do. But it also works either way - unrelated actions for those who are not lending AP, or an AP lend for those who are really more part of the situation.

Mike

Powered by hypermail