On Jousting

I had a really cool idea for how a joust could be handled, but then looked at the actual Going Into Battle move and realized it didn't quite support it, since Going Into Battle doesn't have a "Reduce the harm I inflict by 1". So, although it could be a custom move, here's the idea adapted to actual Going Into Battle.

A joust is a battle, in which standardized tourney lances and armor put Harm at exactly equal to Armor, for all participants. There's the expectation that you will put your choices into things like "seize definite control of your objective" in order to unseat the person from his horse and win. However, once in a while, you'll find someone who plays dirty, and picks "strike hard, inflicting terrible harm." This is cheating, but it could have been an accident (accidents are likely to happen on a miss.). If you think the person you're facing off against is likely to cheat, you might pick "You protect yourself, suffering reduced harm." But, in a joust, timing is definitely going to matter, so you have to pick "Protect myself" before the opponent picks "strike hard", reducing your ability to actually pick things that will help you win.

This only works for a PC vs. PC joust, of course, though it could maybe work if an NPC cheater had a custom move that let him do +1 harm in a joust.

Anyway, just a cool rules application idea. I'm really looking forward to playing/running AW:DA. Unfortunately I have to wait until our current game of Sorcerer finishes up. :(

Neeeeh. None of this 3-harm 3-armour jazz. For the formal tilt they use 1-harm easy-shatter tagged blunted lances. The fact that you're rolling means you connected. Taking less harm means you  prevented your opponent from connecting. Doing great harm and taking your objective each boost point value of your strike, with both meaning you've unhorsed your opponent. Impressing means you've got the crowd a-roaring in your favour. Two PCs tilting against each other both pick their options, and anyone reduced to 0-harm misses their opponent, 2-harm + objective means unhorsing.

Cheaters, now, use non-blunted 2- or 3-harm lances (4-harm lances are a little too noticeable to make it through without a lot of co-conspirators in all areas of a tourney). The 2-harm lances are no good against anyone who jousts with shield and a helmet, but with shields going out of style, well... accidents happen, after all.

Eh, first off, I really don't like requiring harm for any purpose other than harming someone. Seize definite control means seize definite control. When you inflict terrible harm, it's cause you raised your lance a little bit and struck them in the head. I have a hard time believing that anyone on that field has 3-armor.  Most of that armor is for show. Some of it's made got intricate details that could catch on a lance. Some of those guys leave their visors up so the Ladies can see their face. And a tourney lance is worth 2-harm. I'd rather go into that joust with a blunted lance than my fist, and my fists do 1-harm.

If you want it to take more picks to win, remember that drive your enemy back could easily unseat him as well, and if you pick both, he'd have to cancel both, in order to stay on his horse.

Tower rules jousting as practiced in North Aslake are clearly superior. ;) seriously though, I think both our ways of handling it are good.

I do think I would have jousting be a custom move. Maybe:

When you joust, roll +hard. On a 10+, you gain a point on your opponent. On a 7-9, choose one:
- You and your opponent tie. Neither gain a point.
- You gain a point, but you are injured in the process. Take 1-harm.
- You gain a point, but your horse is injured in the process. It takes 1-harm. Continue riding it at your peril!
- You gain a point, but you seriously injure your opponent (2-harm).
- You gain a point, but it is regarded as gained by chance, trickery or outside interference. The onlookers do not approve.
- Your opponent gains a point, but it is regarded as gained by chance, trickery or outside interference. The onlookers do not approve.

On a miss, your opponent gains a point, and expect the MC to do worse.

I don't know. I like the possible outcomes, but it feels a bit like it crosses the line to me. I think that that's not a problem for every AW player, but it is for me. How about:

When you joust, roll +hard. On a 10+, choose 3. On a 7-9, choose 2. On a miss, choose 1, and be prepared for the MC to do worse.

• You unhorse your opponent.
• You stay on your horse, even if your opponent would otherwise unhorse you.
• You injure your opponent. 2-harm with a tourney lance, 4-harm with a real lance.
• You impress onlookers with your gallantry.

For PC vs. PC, treat like Going Into Battle. For PC vs. NPC, the MC chooses zero or one option, for the NPC.