>
>
> As a player, there are always some contests you are more willing to lose
> than others. Given the difficulty cycle, if you've been on a winning streak
> and are coming up to one of those ones that you really don't want to lose,
> it would seem natural to engineer some less critical contests along the way.
>
At first I found this idea irritating, but on reflection I think it could
be a good thing if handled well. As others have noted, the pass-fail cycle
rule is a tool intended to help narrators create stories with a narrative
flow similar to books and movies. I don't see why it couldn't help the
players do the same thing!
Understanding and accepting the purpose of the rule is critical, though. HQ2 actually says - repeatedly - that the narrator's instincts should be the FIRST determiner of resistances and contest types. Other rules like the pass-fail cycle are used as fall-backs. If the players understand and accept that, then you may find them proposing cool reasons why they should win or loose at the right points in the story so they can be more likely to get the result they want to see at the end of the story.
I remember a game where my character died an sticky death in the sewers the day before he would have learned he was heir to a fortune. It was a fitting end to that particular story, and I loved it!
-Kevin McD
Powered by hypermail