> 1) No longer is there a back and forth of who acts.
>This was one of my favourite parts of the new game, even though I was
a fan of the old Extended Contests, I still disliked the whole turn
taking idea. I even experimented with concurrent contests in the old
>system, with only moderate success.
>
>
>It always felt a bit strange to me that the Simple Contest was based
around two opposing actions conflicting, and the Extended Contest split
these up and fell into a "trading blows" pattern.
I think it is only in that sense of somewhat orthoganal stat use that it comes up as something I want in the new system, and - as I said - they offered other solutions.
Mind you, the Simple Contests were also hinged on the "If you act first and seize the initiative, you can force them to defend on terms they don't like", so it isn't like they were disjointed, imho.
>It really became a problem when I stopped stating NPCs. To my way of
thinking players act and the narrator works out who or what is opposing
it, what goal is implied in that resistance, and how high that
>resistance should be based on any number of factors but mainly story
influenced.
And when two PCs interact?
>Remember that at its core the game system doesn't care if the
resisting side has anything called an ability. As a narrator you may
stat out NPCs or anything else for that matter, but the rules don't
require it, or >even advise you to do it.
Of course. One of the things I enjoy about it.
Powered by hypermail