Review of Play: The Saga of the Westmarch DF Game

[mlangsdorf]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

These two seem mutually contradictory, especially the last sentence on e. If I am allowed to deal with active foes before making sure of the unconscious ones, and can switch between them freely, why do you have to roll not to follow up on a substantially wounded foe? Do you mean you have to roll to not kill them once everyone is dealt with, or you have to roll to not kill them immediately when someone is still trying to stab you in the back?

If someone is still standing, they're still a threat. The guy who is stunned and standing is just as dangerous as the one who is swinging at you.

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

Why the head? Is whacking them with an axe in the torso not considered a "killing blow"?

Torso is fine, but simply cutting off arms is not going to do it.

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

It seems that you want Bloodlust to be a "must exploit any weakness" disad. Is that an accurate summary? So long as everyone is an equal threat to you, you can do whatever you want. But as soon as one enemy is disadvantaged, you have to press that disadvantage in an attempt to kill them even if there are other enemies that present a more immediate threat.

No, I think of it more as "wounded doesn't diminish threat" attitude. Just because you stun someone, doesn't mean that they won't stab you in a back in the second after they recover. They're just as much of an offensive threat as ever - they're just more vulnerable and so should be targeted first.

I'm not penalizing people for resisting disadvantages, so I don't think that starting with the extreme position and letting people roll the dice for control is too much.