I've been footering around with Everlasting Empire over the last few days, having effectively set aside for a spell to let various ideas gestate. One thing that I concluded was that the conflict resolution system, as it stood (even in it's very early state) was far too procedural and boring for a game that was influenced by the fast paced adventures of Dan Dare.

So, retaining some of the elements that previously existed, I've been sitting with a table full of D6, my further thoughts on the mechanics and my notebook.

Conflicts in Six Bullets are straightforward. Both parties set stakes, narrate which attributes, revelations and other aspects apply and roll their dice. The winner gets their way, as well as a bonus of some kind.

Easy enough so far.

I wrote a few ideas down last night for forcing a conflict. That is, escalating it further, keeping on at the conflict to force your own way.

The way this works is that the player forcing the conflict discards a dice, both sides set a new set of (escalated) stakes and then they roll again.

But ... I'm having a few problems with this. Firstly, is there any need for it as a mechanic? Does it do anything? At first I thought it provided a way for a player to push on when they really wanted to achieve a particular outcome.