Hi Florik,
We've always played it as "+1 once per scene" no matter the type of detail. The combat was suitably fast-paced that it didn't feel like too much of a restriction (i.e., the players or the monsters were dead/fleeing after 4 to 6 rounds). If it feels oppressive, I could be convinced that "class details of +1 can be exploited once per level per scene" would work not too badly.
Best,
Slade
Hey Slade, thank you for the answer, that was helpful.
May I ask just one more convoluted question? I'm not sure I understand scene details, even with the examples you give in the rules.
It's really the second example that gives me a headache:
I'd be more than happy to hear your thoughts on that problem.
Hey Florik,
Glad to see someone else grappling with the rules to the same extent that I do!
Your mace example is right on. The tiles are now smashed, and it's up to you to discover opportunities to exploit (of which your two examples are great, and you'd get that +1 for either when exploited).
The second example is not a great example on my part, the more I look at it. I think in that specific play session I was trying to get the bandit to let go of something that was in his left hand, like a weapon or a key (this was many years ago, so my memory is hazy). In our early play sessions, we mostly dealt damaging hard details like "Battered" or "Deep Incision" because they were pretty broad, and therefore, were ripe for exploitation (I had some fairly cheesy players at that time). Nowadays, I would encourage the sort of play you're describing "Okay, I hit the bandit with a hard detail? I put down "Slashed left arm" on him as a detail." It's not a tactical thing, as such, it's just a certain type of hit.
(As an aside: This is the sort of area where I hope I'm offering up a fruitful void in the game's design. Some play groups will say you have to spend a turn 'earning your aim' at a specific part of the body, because that's hard to do and you give up opportunities in combat to do it, whereas others will apply more specific details because that's more flavourful and interesting to them, even if it might be harder to justify exploiting them later on.)
Anyhow, sorry for the headache!
Best,
Slade
Thank you, Slade, that really is helpful. Sure, some things will always have to be negotiated by individual groups, but I think I now have a better understanding of the intended game flow. For tonight we have another session scheduled, and our GM (who is also following this discussion) has hinted at upcoming fights, so your timely advice is very much appreciated.
Glad to help!
The directions groups take the rules is always really interesting for me to hear. And it's so tough with a 30-odd page text to create a narrative basket that doesn't have many, many large holes. I'd really like to revisit this game system in a fuller form some day. Perhaps that could happen in 2024 or 2025. If I do, I'll certainly think long and hard on these distinctions among detail types.
Hope you enjoy the session! And let me know if I can offer further interpretations.
Best,
Slade
