Difference between revisions of "TrialBySchmendrick/HouseofLeisureVsBitterFlower"

Latest revision as of 01:18, 6 April 2010

Trial started: {date}
Trial completed: {date}

Home: House of Leisure Style, "Leisure"

PassengerPigeon.

Away: Bitter Flower Style, "Flower"

Kraken.

Signs

Sign 1: details
Sign 2: details
...
Sign n: details

Transcript

Setup

Round 1

Flavor text describing the events, stunts, etc.

Mechanics of one fighter

Mechanics of another fighter. If a fighter makes an attack, use the attack steps. Second Edition, for example, would be:

Attack specifics, including charm use.
1. Additional details, like countercharms
2. Or other responses to the attack made during this step
Defense declaration
Attack roll
Attack reroll
External penalties
Defense reroll
Base damage
Soak
Counterattacks
Result

Round 2

Round n

Conclusions

A section for what was learned

Home player

Away player

Observers

Initial Negotiations

Kraken: here are my initial, extremely talkative and long-winded thoughts.

Obviously, we're Sidereals using first edition. No animas?
I'd like to be able to use a weapon, since I can. Obviously you can't; maybe we can get a certain number of Artifact dots to split between ourselves and our allies (see below).
House of Leisure has a lot of charms that depend on having allies; thus, I'd really like to be able to have at least one. I'm not sure how best to implement this, though.
We both have some Charms that create or affect social rolls. Perhaps this could be connected to the effectiveness of our allies in some respect? (I do have more.)
My form Charm affects astrological effects on myself or others, so ideally, I'd have one of those too.
With your agreement, shall we assume a two-die stunt every round?

--PassengerPigeon

Apologies for the delay in this reply. I've been distracted by what amounts to not that much.

Sidereals, 1st Ed, no Animas suits me just fine.
I don't have a problem with us having some dots, but I think it's probably easiest if we stick to canonical artifact weapons, rather than having to agree on those stats too.
On the Social Rolls: I think not on this one. It's not a typical in game effect of social rolls, so it is giving the style a functionality it doesn't ordinarily possess. Even if you have one you want to suggest, I think that it's best to try one thing at once, not two.
I am fine with that stunt ruling. It seems to cover 95% of the games I play.
Allies is the thing I am most unsure of. They significantly complicate the state of play. If we do have them, I suggest they should be terrestrials with an identical TMA.

-- Kraken

I'm fine with canonical artifact weapons, and your ally stipulation sounds fine to me. Do you think we should have other people jump in and play them, or should we just run them both? --PassengerPigeon

So, I suppose that leaves us with the questions of

How many dots?
How many allies?
Also, which combat ordering do you want to use? 1e or 2e?

On the subject of others playing, I think it might be quicker if we play our own allies, since then we're only waiting for each other, not for one or more other players.

-- Kraken

One ally is fine with me. How about three Artifact dots, split between ourselves and our ally? I'm probably going to take a daiklaive, leaving me one point, while you will put all three into your ally's weapon -- the easiest way to do this is if his style uses hammers.

I don't know what combat ordering means. Also, I just realized that we haven't discussed the environment yet. I'd prefer something somewhat hazardous -- maybe an enormous cairn, marking the death of a behemoth the size of a mountain? Basically a huge stack of rocks around the size of a bowling ball, so not naturally too challenging to maneuver around, but easy to affect with Athletics rolls to make life more difficult for your opponent. Just a random thought. -- PassengerPigeon

Player Chat

A space for the combatants to discuss things with each other.

Observer Comments

If you end up using allies, I (and probably some other wikizens) would be happy to help out by playing such, if that would be desirable. - IanPrice