*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 28, 2014, 12:21:46 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
46709 Posts in 5588 Topics by 13297 Members Latest Member: - Shane786 Most online today: 24 - most online ever: 429 (November 03, 2007, 04:35:43 AM)
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: [DITV] Healing conflicts bogged down  (Read 970 times)
David Shockley
Member

Posts: 21


« on: August 31, 2009, 12:51:03 PM »

At the end of my last session I went through all the questions in the section of the book on reflection fallout. When I asked the players where the action bogged down, they said healing conflicts. So, I'm looking for advice on how to have fun with a healing conflicts, but I also have a couple of rules questions to make sure I'm doing them correctly.

1, can a PC or an NPC join a healing conflict to oppose the healer, or should this be a seperate conflict. If its a seperate conflict, with the healing conflict as a follow-up, should the dying PC participate?
2, can the PC healing escalate. (In the book it says he rolls the dying characters body, and his acuity) If so what counts as escalating, and what counts as "regular healing".
3, can the dying PC participate in the healing conflict?
4,What size fallout does the healer take. I've been assuming physical.

Details of my the healing conflicts in my game, so that people can give me advice:

The first one was to save a possessed boy who had been trying to murder the steward. The steward fought back, with the PC's help, and the kid was dying. One player wanted to save him, one was ok with saving him and helped the other player as an improvised item. The steward rolled in opposition to saving his life. As I recall the steward stuck to just talking, and wasn't in the conflict very long.

The other one was to save a PC. They had just fought (and killed) a Sorcerer. The PC's necklace had caught on a tree branch and cut open her neck, getting lost inside the wound.

In both cases "the injury" was raising with purely physical stuff. Blood gushing out; convulsions; some of the necklace getting lost inside the wound, and carried down further into the body, causing internal bleeding; going into shock. Things like that (probably not medically plausible, but we bought it, so thats ok I think).

Thanks in advance.
Logged

Noclue
Member

Posts: 351


« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2009, 03:52:54 PM »

As a general comment, you might be better off just Giving when a healing conflict stops being interesting to the players and moving to the next thing.

I would have handled the steward as a conflict between the Dogs and the Steward with the stakes of "Do we try to save the boy?" If the Dogs won, I would consider just saying yes and having them heal the child.

The necklace injury sounds like a straight forward healing to save the PC. Really, saving the PC's life bogged down? They didn't care if the Dog died?

Logged

James R.
David Shockley
Member

Posts: 21


« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2009, 10:02:41 PM »

I will definitely give if I'm obviously going to lose, but that wasn't the case when they were trying to save the PC. I don't think it bogged down because they didn't care about the outcome, my impression is that the problem was the body of the conflict, the content of the raises and sees.

Logged

Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!