Here's another option to allow characters to do better in contest, allow them to take a new ability and immediately add it to their target number or advantage points. They choose the level of ability and, through negotiation with the GM, choose the name. You could even allow this after a player has rolled the dice, it might mean re-evaluating masteries and the like but who cares?
So Greek bloke pegs it home from Marathon, his player rolls the dice and realises he's onto a major looser here. He takes "Dying from heat exhaustion 20W", gets an extra 2 masteries and he's home, dry and slightly snuffed it after gasping his message out.
Another example: some poor Sartarite in the middle of nowhere get's a hacking cough. His player really cocks up the dice roll in an extended contest he'd normally expect to win to beat the disease killing him off. In desperation the character cries out to Malia (his player taking "I worship the mistress of disease 10W") to help him, his player grabs another 30 advantage points and is still in the contest.
Final Example: Arthur's facing down Mordred. Mordred does really well but Arthur's having none of it, he want's the little shit dead. His player talks it over with the GM and takes a massive 20W4 "run through." Mordred goes down in a heap under Excalibur and Arthur's got a spear sticking through him. Cue the "Lob me sword, mush" speech.
The advantage of this is the GM chooses the ability, the player chooses the amount of extra oomph he or she needs to win the contest. As a player you can win anything but you have to choose whether gaining the extra ability is worth it.
You might allow characters to get less advantage from abilities that aren't permanent. So taking the "Perish Erect" example that various people have been bandying about the hero could take "lacerated feet 10W" in one contest to get enough oomph to get away from Snape. However he'll only gain half of the ability score as additional target number/advantage points as in the next adventure someone will have kissed them better and he'll loose the ability.
Oh, this hasn't been playtested so it might turn out to be as usable as the mysticism rules. I'd be interested to hear though if anyone tries it.
> --- Rob <robert_m_davis_at_...> wrote:
> > --- In HeroQuest-rules_at_yahoogroups.com, Jane
> > Williams
> > <janewilliams20_at_...> wrote:
> > > I thought I had, with the Marathon one.
> > >
> > Which I had given MY solution to. Not the right or
> > universally
> > accepted solution, but my one, as I read the
> I can't now remember which one was yours :(
> > > There's always a straight combat - standard
> > results
> > > say that if you inflict any level of defeat on
> > your
> > > opponent, you take no damage.
> > Not completely unscathed, but not enough to take a
> > penalty.
> Exactly. Which may not be what we want. "enemy dead,
> me badly injured" is the option we're after here, as
> an alternative to "enemy injured, me fine".
> > > Or how about the case of the children trapped
> > > burning building? How many can you get out? All,
> > > undamaged: none, they all die screaming horribly
> > as
> > > their parents watch...?
> > >
> > > How much damage you take doing it is a separate
> > > question. But the Roolz at present assume that
> > any
> > > level of success (some kids out), you take no
> > negative
> > > consequences at all.
> > Ah, but the burning building would be a series of
> > simple contests
> Let's say we're doing it as a simple contest. Just
> > In some films a
> > whole hour is given to the events in such a
> > situation.
> Sure, and then we're probably over to extended
> again, there is no way of getting yourself injured
> while succeeding).
> > I think this is why Heroquest is described as a
> > toolkit of mechanisms
> > to use to resolve dramatic situations. There are
> > hard and fast
> > rules about what you should use and when.
> No, but we do seem to be lacking a tool at this
> I *can* carry on using the handle of the screwdriver
> as a hammer, but I'd rather not.
Powered by hypermail