Most recent edit on 2008-01-22 08:44:29 by AdminMatt
Additions:
Rules options aren't official errata (see here for official errata to Covenant∞), they're ways to customise the game to your preference, with notes on how those modifications will impact play at large.
Deletions:
Rules options aren't official errata (see here for official errata to Covenant∞), they're ways to customise the game to your preference, with notes on how those modifications will impact play at large.
Edited on 2008-01-22 08:43:58 by AdminMatt
Additions:
Rules options aren't official errata (see here for official errata to Covenant∞), they're ways to customise the game to your preference, with notes on how those modifications will impact play at large.
Deletions:
Rules options aren't official errata, they're ways to customise the game to your preference, with notes on how those modifications will impact play at large.
Harsher External Pressures
If you want the game to be more heavily focused on external conflicts, then I recommend giving antagonists seven, rather than six trait slots. This makes the external forces acting on a character in conflict more oomph early on and forces players to resolve truisms earlier to be able to match them.
Loser goes First
Normally in a two person conflict, you just take turns to modify. In this rules variant, in each exchange the loser always goes first, and is followed by the winner. This effectively makes dual participant conflicts exactly like multi-participant ones.
Edited on 2008-01-12 11:42:51 by AdminMatt
Additions:
If you want the game to be more heavily focused on external conflicts, then I recommend giving antagonists seven, rather than six trait slots. This makes the external forces acting on a character in conflict more oomph early on and forces players to resolve truisms earlier to be able to match them.
Deletions:
If you want the game to be more heavily focused on external conflicts, then I recommend giving antagonists seven or eight, rather than six trait slots. This makes the external forces acting on a character in conflict more oomph early on and forces players to resolve truisms earlier to be able to match them.
Edited on 2008-01-12 11:42:26 by AdminMatt
Additions:
Categorised Traits
Deletions:
Categoried Traits
Edited on 2008-01-07 05:05:44 by AdminMatt
Deletions:
boclaviro
Edited on 2008-01-06 23:47:47 by SitpaSvial (unregistered user) [eltlaolo]
Additions:
boclaviro
Edited on 2007-11-27 10:20:36 by AdminMatt
Deletions:
actrnoletoc
Edited on 2007-11-26 05:48:00 by EltriCroll (unregistered user)
Additions:
actrnoletoc
Edited on 2007-10-18 11:58:16 by AdminMatt
Additions:
In larger games (4+ players), even with quick cutting, some players will be watching the main scene while waiting for their own turn. This can be annoying. To give them something to do, switch control of the convention and motifs to those not directly in a scene. So if they narrate in something on top of an involved player's action, they can give that player the reroll...
Deletions:
In larger games (4+ players), even with quick cutting, some players will be watching the main scene while waiting for their own turn. This can be annoying. To giv ethem something to do, switch control of the convention and motifs to those not directly in a scene. So if they narrate in something on top of an onvolved player's action, they can give them the reroll...
Edited on 2007-08-26 05:03:01 by AdminMatt
Additions:
Convention & Motif Switch
In larger games (4+ players), even with quick cutting, some players will be watching the main scene while waiting for their own turn. This can be annoying. To giv ethem something to do, switch control of the convention and motifs to those not directly in a scene. So if they narrate in something on top of an onvolved player's action, they can give them the reroll...
Edited on 2007-08-24 10:08:00 by AdminMatt
Additions:
Rules options aren't official errata, they're ways to customise the game to your preference, with notes on how those modifications will impact play at large.
If you find that the group feels like every conflict is about crow-barring in traits, this option will help (though being more critical as a group will too!). Assign each trait (not relationships) to two arenas, it can only be used in those. So Quick of wit - Social/Other.
Deletions:
Rukles options aren't official errata, they're ways to customise the game to your preference, with notes on how those modifications will impat play at large.
If you find that the group feels like every conflict is about crow-barring in traits, this option will help (though beign more critical as a group will too!). Assign each trait (not relationships) to two arenas, it can only be used in those. So Quick of wit - Social/Other.
Edited on 2007-07-13 06:23:46 by AdminMatt
Additions:
Rukles options aren't official errata, they're ways to customise the game to your preference, with notes on how those modifications will impat play at large.
Categoried Traits
If you find that the group feels like every conflict is about crow-barring in traits, this option will help (though beign more critical as a group will too!). Assign each trait (not relationships) to two arenas, it can only be used in those. So Quick of wit - Social/Other.
If you want the game to be more heavily focused on external conflicts, then I recommend giving antagonists seven or eight, rather than six trait slots. This makes the external forces acting on a character in conflict more oomph early on and forces players to resolve truisms earlier to be able to match them.
Deletions:
If you want the game to be more heavily focused on external conflicts, then I recommend giving antagonists seven rather than six trait slots. This makes the external forces acting on a character in conflict more oomph early on and forces players to resolve truisms earlier to be able to match them.
Edited on 2007-07-05 06:05:23 by AdminMatt
Additions:
Normally in a two person conflict, you just take turns to modify. In this rules variant, in each exchange the loser always goes first, and is followed by the winner. This effectively makes dual participant conflicts exactly like multi-participant ones.
Deletions:
Normally in a two person conflict, you just take turns to modify. In this rules variant, in each exchange the loser always goes first, an is followed by the winner. This effectively makes dual participant conflicts exactly like multi-participant ones.
Edited on 2007-07-03 05:44:59 by AdminMatt
Additions:
Harsher External Pressures
If you want the game to be more heavily focused on external conflicts, then I recommend giving antagonists seven rather than six trait slots. This makes the external forces acting on a character in conflict more oomph early on and forces players to resolve truisms earlier to be able to match them.
Edited on 2007-06-30 06:17:15 by AdminMatt
No differences.
Oldest known version of this page was edited on 2007-06-30 06:17:07 by AdminMatt
Page view:
Rules Options
Loser goes First
Normally in a two person conflict, you just take turns to modify. In this rules variant, in each exchange the loser always goes first, an is followed by the winner. This effectively makes dual participant conflicts exactly like multi-participant ones.
Play without Arenas
I tend to use this option in demo games, because arenas are a bit more complicated to explain quickly and can break the flow if you don't expect them. One you get used to them in play, they add some neat dimensions, but not everybody likes them.
If you find switching arenas breaks your flow of play you may wish to try without them. However be aware of its effects:
- you have to be more harsh as a group in your judging of whether a trait is appropriate, as anything can be thrown into a conflict at any point as the arena no longer acts as a limiter.
- you lose the option to retry a failed conflict goal in a new arena, and the reversals in fiction that causes.
- consequence buildup will be slower