hey guys! i am GMing a game and my players and i are discussing task and intent with regards to circles. here is the issue:
let’s say you wanted to commission a castle. for our purposes here the ob isn’t really important but it could be ob 1 (base) + ob 3 (specific occupation) + ob 2 (higher rank) + ob 3 (friendly disposition) = ob 9. great. so on a success you will have a friendly and capable architect willing to build a castle for you.
let’s say you met the obstacle but didn’t exceed it so this is just a nameless faceless architect npc. now, my players are of the opinion that having succeeded on this circles roll it is now impossible for the construction of the castle to fail. they argue that this faceless nameless npc’s success or failure at this particular task is not really interesting as it doesn’t necessitate the direct involvement of the player characters in the task that the npc is undertaking.
my initial response to this is to say that just because you circled someone capable of a task doesn’t necessarily mean that they are guaranteed to be successful at this task. as i see it this is basically just circling up a castle more than an npc.
i do, however, recognize their arguments that the spotlight should always be on the characters and that circling up an npc for a task only to have him not be completely 100% successful feels like it might go against task and intent.
my players suggest that the intent to have the castle built is tied into the circles roll and so therefore, passing the circles test and not being 100% guaranteed a fully functioning castle would be a violation of intent and task.
i am of the mind that the circles intent is to find someone capable of something, but it doesn’t mean the npc will automatically succeed depending on the task at hand.
what do you guys think? thanks for your time!