The real question (as I think someone put it) is whether or not HQ/QW should try to focus on one or the other of the approaches thrown out here to the exclusion of all else.
I'm less than convinced that's a good idea. Now, just because I think that a straight "ranking is quantifiable measure comparable to a real world situation" scale is asking for trouble, especially cross-genre, doesn't mean I think the world ends if the designers state that that is exactly what they mean. (i.e. Fast = x speed for y number).
Because you do have one scale that can stack infinitely, it is certainly do-able.
I happen to think that the rules as written have sliding scales all over the place, but that's me.
Now, that said - this is a confusing interpretation point, but is it really a tricky situation as Robin was asking?
I know some got proposed before this huge (and important) sidetrack.
Do we have people willing to weigh in on ideas concerning those?
It seemed we were getting some traction on the orthogonal contest question, for instance.
How about "what is an unrelated action" mechanically?
How about, "does AP change include mechanical change in odds, or does that require an unrelated action"? (i.e. - Can I disarm you and thus remove the use of an ability with an AP bid only or do I have to take an unrelated action to do that?)
LC
Powered by hypermail