>> Now there may be situations in which you can't reasonably change to a
>> certain goal, without allowing your opponent to win. But the barbarian and
>> princess situation is not one of them. Just because you kiss her, doesn't
>> mean that you've accepted the premise of the original argument. You've just
>> changed tactics and your goal.
>
>But if you're losing a contest, unless you switch to a goal and an
>ability which gives you a very good shot of taking your opponent out
>with a single action, then you're probably still going to lose the
>contest because when it comes to the opponent's turn, they're going to
>go back to the ability they were kicking your butt with to try and
>finish you off. Your APs don't change. You're still losing the contest
>and if you have an ability that's so much of a sure thing, then why
>weren't you using it before your APs got so low?
>
>So in all likelihood, the barbarian kisses the princess and she, after
>straightening her tiara and fixing him with an icy glare, eviscerates
>him with more proof of her point, adding that he kisses like a cow and
>smells worse.
Thinking about it, isn't this a case of unrelated actions. If the barbarian wins the simple contest with a complete victory the princess collapses in his arms whispering "you're wonderful" and gives up on the contest she was winning. Other victories will produce "I like you to, but you're still wrong." with the extended contest continuing. Defeats of course produce results like you describe.
-- Donald Oddy http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/
Powered by hypermail