> I have been toying with the idea of making feats more interesting
> by treating them as also having the option of being more
> "spell-like" one-offs. So Breathe Flame instead of being a 10 AP
> bid would instead be an unrelated action done as a Simple Contest
> in an attempt to get a Major Victory (I suppose I am thinking back
> to Pendragons ?Major Wounds?) e.g. Major Victory effects last for a
> season or more so the loser is horribly burned and at -50% on all
> skills until healed or a season passes.
IMHO we need to hold two ideas in our heads simultaneously.
1 - During an extended contest, the results of any action are
measured (i.e. rules speak) in an AP change or in a rating change or
in an edge change.
2 - If magic is used, it has effects which can be described in
narrative.
For example, say that a character uses a flying feat to try to get a
better position during an extended group combat.
The major different results are (ignoring criticals, fumbles and the
elusive ties):
- Character succeeds, opponent fails: The character is now flying
and has gained an advantageous position (the opponent suffers a
loss of twice the APs bid).
- Character fails, opponent succeeds: The character did not take off
and, while he was making the attempt, the opponent gained an
advantageous position (the character suffers a loss of twice the
APs bid).
- Character fails, opponent fails: The character did not take off
and, while he was making the attempt, the opponent failed to
capitalise on his distraction leaving them both more vulnerable to
third party actions (both loose the APs bid).
- Character succeeds, opponent succeeds better: The character is now
flying but the opponent managed to get an advantage while the
character was distracted during take off (the character suffers a
loss of the APs bid).
- Character succeeds better, opponent succeeds: The character is now
flying and while he managed to get a good position, the opponent
managed to neutralise some of the advantage (the opponent suffers a
loss of the APs bid).
In each case, there is a narrative effect and an AP change.
The problem I see with the change that Andrew proposes is that it completely misses the point of the extended contest mechanism and removes the dramatic tension that a well played extended contest can give. If an extended contest can be cut short by a simple contest as you suggest then why not run it as a simple contest in the first place?
To get back to the Breathe Flame example, if the character wants this effect in a single roll during an extended contest then they should be prepared to bid big time (how about all of your current APs) with all of the risks that this entails. And have some spare Hero Points handy!
However, an issue that has arisen in the game I play in (Hello Benedict!) is the game mechanical one of judging the rating levels of opponents so as to give the characters a good hard but not impossible extended contest.
This question has been asked in many different ways (how hard should a heroquest be etc.) and until GMs either have sufficiently internalised the maths of the rules system or get tools* that do it for them then players and GMs will feel unhappy with the extended contest mechanism. Hence, IMO, the proposed changes to magic.
This is a criticism of not so much the Hero Wars system itself (and certainly not a criticism of anyone that is proposing rules variants) as it is a criticism of the lack of rules support material, particularly worked examples. Where is the worked example of Morden Defends the Camp that we were told was coming six months ago?
At the same time, I don't want to be too critical of Issaries - at the end of the day, I will always vote for background material such as Thunder Rebels and Storm Tribe over rules related material. There is only so much that a small games company with limited resources can do.
regards,
Charles
Powered by hypermail