Re: mechanics of surprise

In article <slrneuokrn.6d4.neelk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Neelakantan Krishnaswami  <neelk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>The number of mechanical events has no correlation with the pace of
>decision. For example, in the game Nine Worlds, you determine who will
>gain and lose in a scene with a card draw at the start of the scene,
>and then play through the scene in a freeform way subject to the
>constraint on the final outcome.

My personal definition for "pace of decision":  how many chances
does a character have to change his strategy before the outcome
is determined?

If two fighters are hacking on each other, each doing about 10
points a turn, and each having about 100 hp, then a character
has about 10 turns to decide "Screw this, I should run away/
surrender/change weapons/yell for help/whatever."

If two fighters are hacking on each other, each doing about
50 points a turn, and each having about 100 hp, then a character
has only two turns to change his strategy.  

The latter situation obviously puts a higher premium on 
pre-planning as there are very few chances to change a bad
strategy once combat has begun.  It also greatly increases the
deadliness of anything that gives a character an extra action,
or deprives a character of an action--such as surprise.

It doesn't matter how much game time is in a "turn" for these
purposes.  A "turn" could be hours or seconds, but the effect
(a player in the section situation has almost no leeway between
"Hm, this is a problem" and "Damn, he's dead") is the same.

Mary Kuhner mkkuhner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]