This thought popped in my head while reading the discussion on CaGI. Imagine a game with the following situation (one dimensional to simplify things):
1 2 3 4
- A X -
A is a PC named Anna, X is an orc. The two are engaged in a sword fight. Now this game has a rule that if a combatant successfully hits an opponent, she can shift both herself and the opponent one square in the same direction, to simulate movement in combat. Now, Anna hits the orc and takes the following shift:
1 2 3 4
- - A X
I think most gamers would be totally okay with this, seeing this as Anna forcing the orc back.
But suppose Anna took the following shift instead:
1 2 3 4
A X - -
I think there would be a significant number of gamers who would object to allowing that shift, that it just does not fit with their vision of how combat should work.
So is the second shift justifiable? Or should the game only allow the first shift?
1 2 3 4
- A X -
A is a PC named Anna, X is an orc. The two are engaged in a sword fight. Now this game has a rule that if a combatant successfully hits an opponent, she can shift both herself and the opponent one square in the same direction, to simulate movement in combat. Now, Anna hits the orc and takes the following shift:
1 2 3 4
- - A X
I think most gamers would be totally okay with this, seeing this as Anna forcing the orc back.
But suppose Anna took the following shift instead:
1 2 3 4
A X - -
I think there would be a significant number of gamers who would object to allowing that shift, that it just does not fit with their vision of how combat should work.
So is the second shift justifiable? Or should the game only allow the first shift?