> For me the game works best when I think of it as an asymmetrical system -
> all modifiers are applied on the PCs' side and Opposition is only thought
> of as an appropriate Resistance, so in your example all the
> PCs would face the same Resistance, possibly with individual situational
> Modifiers or Augments.
In practise you might find it easier to run the other way around - apply as few modifiers to the players characters as possible and incorporate things like situational modifiers into the resistance. Treat all modifiers as changes to the resistance and not modify the player character's abilities at all, apart from augments and anything lingering that's written down on the character sheets. This means the players can keep track of their target numbers and you can keep track of the resistances. It saves all the back and forth rules crap that slows a lot of games down - you don't have to tell them the exact game mechanical effect of their choices or situation AND they don't have to apply the modifier.
So instead of saying "You don't know these people's customs that well, you're rolling at -6" you just tell them "This is going to be a toughy, roll that icosahedron!"
> I dislike the Multiple Opponents rules for Extended
> Contests. They often
> just don't capture the "Narrative" feel I'm looking for. In
> a Swashbucklers
> campaign PCs fighting off 20 (or more!) minions seems
> completely
> appropriate. The example of the PC/NPC debate (HQ2 pg 41)
> wouldn't make
> sense to me with Multiple Opponent penalties. They make a
> bit more sense in
> a fight like the detailed example (HQ2 pg 44-49), but even
> then I sometimes
> like the ability to have all the Contests end at the same
> time in classic
> narrative Climactic fashion.
>
Why don't multiple opponent penalties work for you? You're not going to represent 20 elite Imperial Stormtroopers as individuals - you'd do it as a group, they're one contestant with a "never misses" ability. And against half a dozen player characters there's not going to be any multiple opponent penalties on either side. They're one lump of hurt going after the characters.
If you want truly cinematic combat between a couple of heroes and an army of mooks, HQ works pretty well as written. Just ham up the narrative a bit and it works like a dream. A players Musketeer wins a round. Narrate him ducking as two Cardinal's Guards lunge at him and describe them running each other through. As part of a large group you don't have to worry about narrating consequences for individuals until the end of the fight - they can go down in various messy ways to highlight the successes the players are having.
Ash
Powered by hypermail