Adjudicating the Adventure action.

[The Dark Lily/ML]

Here are my rules for adjudicating the Adventure action, comments are welcome.

[X-Haelyn's Aegis/RK (Andy)]

Looks familiar!

It's a handy way of dealing with minor adventures that wouldn't get played out on the forum's or by email, but for the main adventures I don't think that Bjorn's too fussed about rulesets or rolls.

[The Dark Lily/ML]

Those sorts of random little adventures are exactly what it was intended for, when a player decides to take an Adventure action totally out of the blue, or when a Lieutenant is doing an unspecified adventure in support of a regent's action.

[X-Osoerde (Alan)]

Lots of tables...is there an assumption that some adventures will not generate treasure or injury for instance?

[X-Haelyn's Aegis/RK (Andy)]

Lots of tables...is there an assumption that some adventures will not generate treasure or injury for instance?

Page 2 and 3 respectively show the tables ;-)

The answer is yes, some adventures would cost more than they generated, or be a dead loss, some adventures would not generate any injury worth noting - personally I'd ignore hp damage on the assumption that it would be healed by the next action anyway, and only note "serious" injuries but that's personal choice, I don't like tracking HP of lieutenants...

The system is fairly flexible, leaving the decision of what is a good investment, what is a poor outcome, etc open, but the idea was to give players some idea of what they could expect.  There was a reasonable amount of comment when it was discussed on BR.net.

[DM B]

Looks promising.

It would be ideal to have some sot of framework beyond the single DAC to resolve minor adventures.

[The Dark Lily/ML]

The HP bit is there because it was written for a table top game, not PBEM. I f you like it Bjorn (or anybody else for that matter) feel free to use it or to tinker with it .