> > And that still doesn't cover the case when the
> player
> > would prefer that it is one of the followers who
> gets away lightly, not the leader. ...
> Sure, but's still a narrator note rather than a
> Rule, per se. "I want to
> make sure Sally doesn't get hurt" is part of a
> combat declaration - the
> Narrator should then take that into account when the
> time comes to hand out those Hurts and Wounds.
Fair enough. In fact I think this is something that we seem to be saying a lot: deciding exactly what the aims of the contest are is vitally important, and most things you might assume as normal/default do need checking.
> Maybe the player will trade two levels worse on
> this follower (the big bruising bodyguard, say) to
> keep that follower (the frail librariian with all
> the mystical knowledge) safe.
Or trade levels between Hero and Follower. Thinking about the "use a different sort of damage" idea, I can see such a follower ending up with a flaw of "feels guilty that Hero got hurt when it should have been me" - but not always!
> It's all variations
> on a theme. Doesn't need a *rule*, just an
> explanation.
Mainly an explanation of in what ways it may sometimes be handy to bend the rules.
> To tell the truth, followers in contests *was*
> written basically as ablative
> armor, and the survival of the PC-Hero was
> considered to be the priimary
> concern of the player.
Tut, tut! And there I was thinking you'd left your dungeon-bashing days behind you!
> But it's also a trope of most heroeic stories that
> the followers are there to 'take a bullet" for the
> heroes, if they are mentioned at all.
True, but....
let me quote at you a bit of the tactics notes from an
NPC I believe you wrote up, and who personally I
regard as the ultimate PC.
"Kallyr protects Ernaldesta whenever she accompanies
the band into combat."
Powered by hypermail