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 said:
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.
2. On 2006-06-13, Vincent said:
I might make the stick the same either way. Any thoughts that they should be different?
3. On 2006-06-13, Piers said:
This as opposed to say, when you win get a d6; if you win again, get another; if you lose, lose them all?
4. On 2006-06-14, anon. said:
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
5. On 2006-06-14, Vincent said:
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.
RSS feed: new comments to this thread
This thread is closed to new comments.
home: anyway.
newer thread: 2006-06-15 : The who and why of the owe list
older thread: 2006-06-12 : New Mechaton dice rules
