Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8006239" data-attributes="member: 42582">[USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER], [USER=6785785]@hawkeyefan[/USER]On the issue of mechanics and &quot;yielding&quot; in this particular context I don't know that I have all that much more to add.The claim that &quot;any resolution system could land on the OP's outcome, the same way the application of 5E's did&quot; seems false to me. Prince Valiant won't, because one feature of its system for establishing consequences is that PC death should rarely be in issue. So executions are off the table. In my Prince Valiant game, <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/more-prince-valiant-actual-play.655042/" target="_blank">when the PCs found themselves at odds with an evil and treacherous NPC</a>, the NPC called for a joust to prove his innocence. He won, and hence the PCs rode on, later to hear news that the older brother of the NPC in question had mysterioulsy died, leaving the NPC the undisputed ruler of Fort Seahawk.In Burning Wheel the stakes should generally be made explicit if they are not already implicit. In our game, when the PCs acccused the evil cleric in the Keep on the Borderlands of being such, the result was a duel of honour which (again) the PC (played by the same player) lost. In a scenario closer to the OP's one, the introduction of the guards, and the consequences thereof, would be handled very differently from what is described - BW invites and requires the GM to be far more thoughtful about framing than seems to have been the case in the OP.In the 5e context I would think some of these ideas could equally be applied - hawkeyefan has sketched out a good range of possibilities already, both just upthread and earlier in the thread also.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8006239, member: 42582"] [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER], [USER=6785785]@hawkeyefan[/USER] On the issue of mechanics and "yielding" in this particular context I don't know that I have all that much more to add. The claim that "any resolution system could land on the OP's outcome, the same way the application of 5E's did" seems false to me. Prince Valiant won't, because one feature of its system for establishing consequences is that PC death should rarely be in issue. So executions are off the table. In my Prince Valiant game, [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/more-prince-valiant-actual-play.655042/']when the PCs found themselves at odds with an evil and treacherous NPC[/URL], the NPC called for a joust to prove his innocence. He won, and hence the PCs rode on, later to hear news that the older brother of the NPC in question had mysterioulsy died, leaving the NPC the undisputed ruler of Fort Seahawk. In Burning Wheel the stakes should generally be made explicit if they are not already implicit. In our game, when the PCs acccused the evil cleric in the Keep on the Borderlands of being such, the result was a duel of honour which (again) the PC (played by the same player) lost. In a scenario closer to the OP's one, the introduction of the guards, and the consequences thereof, would be handled very differently from what is described - BW invites and requires the GM to be far more thoughtful about framing than seems to have been the case in the OP. In the 5e context I would think some of these ideas could equally be applied - hawkeyefan has sketched out a good range of possibilities already, both just upthread and earlier in the thread also. [/QUOTE]

Verification