Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Xervous" data-source="post: 9762965" data-attributes="member: 6747541">The given definition feels rather vague and doesn’t really cover the incentives, decision flow, and norms of the system. Accumulating temporary penalties encourage players to avoid risky scenes when they are not at full strength. Trivial combat is likely to remain trivial unless the penalties are rather large or there’s enough swinginess in the dice for players to be wary of sudden death when already injured. The degree to which a system allows the players to easily retreat affects how they will pick/avoid fights. This implementation is generally a pacing mechanic. More permanent penalties, especially those that are primarily felt beyond the scope of the immediate scene, instead ask the players how much they value the outcome of the scene relative to how much they value the continued intact existence of their character. The given example with the Gondor warrior features a character that’s probably retiring from the narrative after that scene, but the character remains relevant through the scene. In other words, players get to risk/spend the character in part or in whole to influence scenes beyond what the world suggests is the expected outcome. Both of these examples guide player decision making and establish patterns of play. It’s best to look at this from a problem statement rather than hoisting up a specific solution to an open ended question. Quite simply “how do you want the players to interact with injury and what systems can you put in place to encourage that behavior?”A given system is best judged by its fitness for satisfying a stated design goal. Death spiral satisfies verisimilitude and pacing, “vote with character’s life” enables narrative patterns that are desirable for producing scenes like the aforementioned Gondor warrior.</blockquote>

Verification