Re: (TFT) More PvK's thoughts.

[Rick Smith <rsmith@lightspeed.ca>]

On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 21:15, Peter von Kleinsmid wrote:
> I guess I haven't absorbed exactly what the play style is. ...
> 
Hi all, PvK.
  I guess my answer would be that the wargame should
be self contained.  GM's that want to have lots of 
low level decisions overlayed with the game can do
so when ever and where ever they wish.

> For the concern you mentioned before about having the detailed PC 
> resolution remove the risk, as in the case of a danger event played out in 
> TFT being completely won by the players... I guess it's a decision whether 
> that is enough, or whether the abstract danger roll should be required to 
> have some negative effect - hence the dilemma-type decisions. Kind of like 
> in wargames where the player taking damage sometimes gets to decide which 
> units take the damage, or which direction his units will retreat.

  Yes, that is the crux of the problem.  As for who
decides where the unit retreats in games, I've 
played TFT both ways, (where the hurt player chooses
where to retreat and where the damaging player picks).

  If the damaged player picks, they will sometimes 
retreat along the edge of the attacking player the
better to surround him.  If the damaging player picks
then the hurt character always goes into the one hex
which has a pit.


> 
> It can definitely be a non-trivial problem to resolve all such concerns. Be 
> sure to add the "GM discretion" caveat somewhere. ;-)
> 
> PvK

  ALL expansions to the rules of a RPG have that!

  Regards, Rick.
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"