Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rune" data-source="post: 6230940" data-attributes="member: 67">First of all, thank you for your interest!  I think some of this may have been touched on in the update, but here is a response off the top of my head:Characters assist each other by performing actions that either create aid within the context of the narrative of the game or that create temporary attributes (a concept introduced in the update) for the assisted character to use.  Because there are no turns in the game, it isn't uncommon for someone to say they're going to try something, only to be interrupted by someone else saying they want to do something to set the first character up in some way.  When this happens, you should completely resolve the assisting character's action first.  It's all actually very intuitive.One way to think of the bidding back-and-forth during combat is to describe it as a blow-by-blow exchange between two combatants.  This is a bit easier to do if both participants start with low bids and work upward (and there is a mechanical reason to want to do that, anyway).Another thing to keep in mind is that when you place a bid, you are representing both an outcome and a level of risk you are willing to accept to see it happen (this will be easier to envision if bids actually state both elements) .  The opponent likewise represents an outcome and an acceptable level of risk.  But the actual action isn't resolved--and doesn't happen--until the bidding stops.  By necessity, the winner won't achieve everything s/he was representing because the loser wouldn't--or couldn't--accept that level of risk.While you are, of course, welcome to experiment with the rules in any way your group wants, I recommend that you consider the ramifications of making this change in a game that has no random elements in action resolution.  If you allow the possibility of forcing outcomes on the losing side, whoever has the highest attributes and the most tokens can be a bully and basically dictate the rest of the game.Don't worry too much about countering larger bids with small ones; that's just part of the strategy of the game (and it's also a great way to make sure your villains get a chance to reoccur).  If you feel the players are doing this with impunity, make sure to vary the resulting complications and keep them relevant during the course of the session! Glad you enjoyed it and I hope I've been able to help you out!  I would indeed like to see that scenario if you do want to share it.  In the meantime, here's an account of a game that I ran with the Token System, converting the old AD&D module, I6 Ravenloft, on the fly.  It starts on the second page of <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?334833-Streamlining-I6-Ravenloft" target="_blank">this thread. </a>Edit == One more thing: when your opponent bids way under you, your own final bid drops to one more than your opponent's (so you don't end up spending lots of tokens for little effect).  This fix/clarification might have been part of the revision, rather than the original version; I don't remember.</blockquote>

Verification