Alexandre says
>Let's take an example. The actor declares to swing at his foe with his
>broadsword. The opponent declares that he is going to parry with his
>shield (elaborate at your leisure, my English isn't good enough to
>improvise colorful descriptions). The same actor declares the same
>swing. The same opponent declares that he will lunge at his foe while
>he is opening his guard to attack. The two situations seem to me very
>different, but since the APs that are going to be lost/transferred are
>the same, the game system does not tell the difference.
This is as it should be, IMO. Who can say whether one defence is better than the other? The Games system is not trying to mimic the mechanical process of the combat, but the overall ebb and flow of advantages until one character emerges as the victor. Someone (Mikko? I forget) suggested that the lack of system effect meant players would not bother to describe their defence. I find that a very false argument, since it is describing the actions that you get to see the differences between them. So, assuming in both of your examples the actor bids 10 points ands looses a 1x loss. If you have defended with a shield parry, you obviously blocked his broadsword, and now have a chance to skewer him with your own sword. I would be unlikely to let you cause a wound with this defence. If you had choose to lunge, on the other hand then causing a wound would be no problem, while a Dodge manoeuvre might let you move closer too (or farther from) something else in the area (a fallen colleague, a dropped fetish, a Dragons egg, a bottomless chasm, etc etc).
-- +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Tim Ellis EMail tim_at_... | | Hang Ideas! They are tramps, vagabonds knocking at the back door of your| +---------------mind (Joseph Conrad - "Lord Jim")-------------------------+
Powered by hypermail