>< PS I don't have problems with arrow fights either, now I just have to
>persuade my simulationist GM to use Simple Contests and get on with the
>interesting roleplaying bits.
'I'm not sure that that word means quite what you think it means'.
Running a whole bunch of Simple Contests for a detail of a combat like archery is not only lots of extra dice rolling and book-keeping, (i.e. archer #4 has a -7 wound penalty now), it is has the statistical property that each contest is independent of all previous contests.
This means it works like the world actually does, and not how people think it does.
In anything other than a self-consciously realistic war novel, if the hero comes under heavy gun-fire, the first few shots _will_ miss. If he retreats to cover, all will be fine. On the other hand, if he stays out in the open too long (to attempt to drag someone to safety, or whatever), then he _will_ be hit.
This is why extended contests work the way they do - they follow narrative logic. In other words, they are designed to produce a plausible-sounding result, not a realistic one.
In this case, despite the name, they also take less time. If you use archery to inflict wounds, you will end up meleeing opponents with full APs, but rather lower target numbers. This is precisely the case where an extended contest takes the longest, and is least interesting.
Incidentally, if you played HW using quick contests for everything, including each sword blow, you would have something indistinguishable from RQ with the hit locations taken out.
Anyone tried this?
Richard
Powered by hypermail