Might make even more sense to merge the Merit/HP update with the existing “Harrowed” update, to remove the automatic, invisible Merit update entirely.

Good point.

Wait, what? I thought you meant I could remove the “Harrowed” part entirely and add the Monster’s Merits update to this part, but now I’m not sure.

The Harrowed update is a voluntary action taken by a player to update necessary gamestate after a battle (“If an Adventurer with non-zero Havoc (known as the “Harrowed”) is not the Monster, any Adventurer may add the Harrowed’s Havoc to the Harrowed’s Merit, then set the Harrowed’s Havoc to zero.”).

The Merit update you’re working from here is an invisible gamestate update that happens automatically, which you’re attaching a “please remember to update this” HP reset to.

May make more sense to combine all of these into a single non-automatic action which is “if someone’s Harrowed, update their Merit, update everyone else’s Merit, and update everyone’s HP”.

Got it. I agree. Give me a few minutes to think how best to implement this.

Yeah. It’s tempting to just attach it to the Harrowed trigger: the only situation it won’t catch is where the battle ended with the Monster dealing no damage, but there was still some inter-Adventurer damage they’d want to have healed. But this seems unlikely to ever happen (particularly as we only have one more Monster to go).

I thought of it, and would still prefer to leave no loopholes. Which means that I’m changing the meaning of Harrowed, and making the removal of this status a prerequisite for the next Battle to begin. (I actually like that it would be less invisible this way.) Truly not-automatic this way.

There. Now you can’t start a Battle if an Adventurer is Harrowed, nor declare victory, and it doesn’t matter whether the Monster is Distracted or a pacifist.

I’ve tried to avoid using an Atomic Action for this, considering the tangles that might occur if someone updated the character sheets in a different order.

I’m usually for avoiding casual AA usage, but I think this one might need it. What stops someone from only taking the first step? And I don’t know what tangles you might be referring to—AA steps can only be done in order, and it’d be fairly obvious if someone zeroed the havoc before transferring it.

I’m ok with the old setup. It seemed to be working alright.

“Once these steps have been completed, the Harrowed Adventurer has been Soothed and is no longer Harrowed.” It has to be all of them.

And that missed dice roll of yours alerted me to the inconveniences of AAs. Perhaps I was over-cautious here, but it’s the sort of thing I wanted to avoid in what was a rather simple series of steps.

I’d be willing to propose this again with an AA if it fails here, but I don’t like the current setup very much. The way that the three after-effects of Battles are in three different places and are done in three different ways cries for improvement, and it annoys me how “Harrowed” is never mentioned because of how it’s handled. Plus, I do think it’s a good idea to ensure that one cannot declare victory before everyone’s Merit has been properly updated.

“It has to be all of them.”

I don’t think it would work that way. If you list a set of steps that may be taken, it is as though you are describing a dance move. I can do the dance for as long as I like, in whatever order I like, for as long as the conditions for the dance being allowed are still met. This is a loose interpretation, but could be valid.

At best, you keep me from taking the steps out of order, but you don’t stop another Adventurer from taking the steps simultaneously!

Basically, the long list of restrictions worked into the AA rule can probably be ignored. If you want to avoid AAs for a complex set of steps, precise language is instead required.

Meanwhile, I’m going to patch that victory condition bug.

aside from the victory condition bug, i’m not sure this is necessary?