Re: Summoning Lesser Gods etc

From: SARAH <sarah.newton5_at_...>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 13:33:31 -0000

Hi Jamie :-)

I take your point absolutely about the slightly ambiguous position of unrelated / asymmetric actions within the broader framework of contest resolution - sometimes they do feel like a task resolution mechanic embedded in an extended contest. Like you say, I guess that's down to framing. Personally, in play, I find it a useful mechanic for dealing with tactical manoeuvres by players (tactical in story terms, obviously :-), such as using a "Swordbreaker" ability to force a switch of abilities mid-contest, etc. Whole different can o'worms there :-)

I think where I've finally got to in my head regarding summonings is to treat the "summon lesser godling"-type abilities as those which effectively give you a Henchman, in HeroQuest terms, ie one single ability which you can use "as if it were one of your own". Obviously in this case it already *is* one of your own - just expressed differently. This is extrapolating from the fact that Divine Companions are treated as Sidekicks, and that ad hoc summoned entities shouldn't be as good or as effective as those.

As Sartar:KoH says on p88, using an unrelated action *during an extended contest* will get you a summoned entity which acts as a specific ability, for a whole scene, so you don't have the broad ability penalty. I'm grokking that treating it as a Henchman doesn't give you an extra action per exchange - just the option of using the summoned entity. However, it's also clear you could get the summoned entity to "obey simple instructions", maybe digging a pit, burning a house, etc, which wouldn't necessarily require a roll.

Of course, you could just take the breakout ability "Summoned Talosi" or similar, then you wouldn't need the unrelated action at all - you'd always have your earth elemental "on tap", without broad ability penalties. Of course, that begs the question, "What does a 'Summon Demon' wizardry spell do?" ;-p

I think I've got my head round it. Mostly.

Cheers!

Sarah   

>
>
> Yes we are certainly reading the same text, and I see it more like your 'however' except there is no reason to worry about "spends a round" because outside of an extended contest there is no reason to worry about moment to moment actions. (Actually, I don't worry about moment to moment stuff even in ECs.)
>
> It isn't purely flavour because, as you point out, you get to use it specifically.
>
> I think the main difference between our perspectives is how it fits into the context of an ongoing conflict. I see this as a dramatic action rather than some kind of missed action. Sure, she isn't directly attacking the opposition, but the example isn't very explicit on the details of the summoning conflict or indeed the surrounding details. In a more detailed example it could be a conflict about summoning whilst under attack.
>
> There is also a bit of a hang-over from HQ1 in the example because the summoning isn't being framed as confict resolution but as a simple task, you get no feeling for an opposed roll or any objective for the opposition, and it gives the impression that it will result in a pass or fail. By the general rules of HQ one could ask why are we rolling at all. I always have problems with these kinds of examples as I would never frame them this way.
>