anyway.
A Penny for Your Thoughts



2006-06-13 : A duh moment for that game
That still title-wanting game.

So Ben tells me that in his game the other night they had some conflicts go on too long too. I expect he was playing by all the current rules, so, I guess it's a thing. I'm musing and duh!

If you win the advantage die a third time in a row, stop. It's a technical win, like a technical knockout. Negotiate an outcome; your stick is the usual exhaustion or injury.

Done.

A question though: should a natural win by doubling be mechanically different than a technical win? If so, the answer that comes to mind is: on a natural win, negotiate an outcome and your stick is exhaustion or injury + 1! Reduce your opponent's stat by 3 die sizes instead of 2.

Time to play this game again.

1. On 2006-06-13, Clinton R. Nixon wrote:


Oh, man - making the stick worse is a pretty mean move. I might make a TKO a smaller stick, instead, but that's just based off two sessions of play.

Marginalia


2. On 2006-06-13, Vincent wrote:


I might make the stick the same either way. Any thoughts that they should be different?

This makes...
Chris go "of course, you might reverse it..."*
 
Marginalia
* click through for explanation


3. On 2006-06-13, Piers wrote:


This as opposed to say, when you win get a d6; if you win again, get another; if you lose, lose them all?

Marginalia


4. On 2006-06-14, anon. wrote:


They should be different. It's a different kind of win. The doubling always feels crushing and final. Maybe a TKO is "they lose 2 but you lose 1"? Do that and people would try hard to avoid it.

This reminds...
JM of That was me, sorry
 
Marginalia


5. On 2006-06-14, Vincent wrote:


The most serious outcome has to be available on the opening roll. Thus, doubling has to be either more serious than or as serious as the technical win.

Marginalia



This comment thread has an RSS feed:
link http://www.lumpley.com/anyway_comments_rss.php?entry=221

anyway.