RE: Re: Cumulative wounds a rules variant

From: Mike Holmes <mike_c_holmes_at_...>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 14:34:45 -0600

>From: "Jamie" <anti.spam_at_...>
>
>Talking past each other again (I think). Yes to using any contest as
>potentially healing, but informed by player framing of circumstance,
>not by some objective measure.
>
>You may agree or otherwise that the rules seem to imply this, but they
>don't say it.

I'm not sure what you're refering to. What's the "objective measure" in question? The rules seem to say to me that the result of a contest can be to reduce a penalty, if the situation is right.

>BTW the healing rules result in getting worse on a total defeat for
>all three tables. No reversal necessary.

OK, but I'd thought you were implying that the level of defeat in such a contest was the new level of the consequence. Otherwise it sounds like we're back to the normal healing rules again.

And we still haven't clarified something. There are three cases:

  1. There's no penalty involved. Normal contest.
  2. There's a penalty involved, normal contest.
  3. There's a penalty involved, "healing" (level adjustment) contest.

It sounds to me like you might be sayign that case 2 shouldn't happen (except in combat), that in all cases where there's a penalty, that it should be case 3. If so, then I'm saying it's a bad idea. If not, then, again, we're back to just the normal healing rules, AFAICT.

>I put it to you, that the physical combat situation is the exception,
>and in any other instance where stacking might result, it would be
>possible to frame the conflict such that the healing table could be
>applied.

See, you're already making an exception. Why not, instead of trying to figure out where the line lies before hand (climbing is not combat; what about painting a house; what about playing with your kids; do these heal physical problems, or are they exepmted too?), why not simply say to take it on a case by case basis?

In which case we have the normal healing rules.

>So we should stop worrying if the rules miraculously heal a broken
>leg, and instead never allow the circumstance of a broken leg (appears
>broken is fine).

Why? Just so that we have an absolute hard line on when to use the healing rules? I like to get rid of narrator judgment, too, but this is akin to trying to make standardized combat contests and the like. Deciding when to use what sort of contest is endemic to heroquest.

Sure you can probably find dramatic logic to account for such, if you really stretch. But to what end?

Mike



Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from Microsoft Office Live
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/

Powered by hypermail