Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8664210" data-attributes="member: 42582">Setting the "unilateral" to one side, I think what you're identifying here is a limitation of 3.5 and GURPS as resolution frameworks.In my Classic Traveller game there have been 3 PC escapes: in one, they took control of the ship onto which they had been taken; in one, they overpowered their captors (though one PC died in the firefight that resulted, after a series of failed checks to escape from the sick bay gurney where he was strapped down); in one, the PC in question was on trial but blew up everyone else with a well-timed grenade. A fourth time, that same PC was arrested, tried and banished.In principle, capture doesn't have to pose any greater problems than any other scene-framing. If the GM treats the fictional position of being captured as a reason to declare that most attempts to escape fail, that's a problem but one that flows from a poor system, not the fictional position as such. This example came into the discussion out of [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER]'s reflections on Apocalypse World, and Apocalypse World never allows the GM to declare a hard move simply on the basis of fictional position that exists only in their imagination. It has to either follow from a failed throw, or from a previous soft move that opens a door through which a player has their PC walk.</blockquote>