soulping | Gulgallana

Gulgallana

[ Suddenly you find yourself on top of a large, team-colored tower -- the ones in the center of the lake, to be precise. Inspecting closer you’ll find that the tower is actually made of removable blocks: large, brittle candy blocks.

Looking around you, all of the other teams’ towers are visible to you, in a circle around the wide lake. But although you can make out the number of blocks in each tower and which team they belong to, it is impossible to yell between towers. Huh.

On top of your platform is a set of three objects on a table, with a sign that says “Eat one and win!”: a Jawbreaker, some Peanut Brittle, and a small cup of Whipped Cream.

There are no handrails or edges, and if you peer over the side, you can see that your tower is standing in a lake made of jello. . . ]

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

ITEMS:

JAWBREAKER: cause two random blocks to be shaken out of an enemy’s tower, and a 1 in 3 chance of them losing a random block the next turn (roll a 3 on a d3)
WHIPPED CREAM: become disoriented, losing the ability to decide what blocks you pick for one round. Effects stack if multiples are played on the same team; does not affect special attacks.
PEANUT BRITTLE: removes two blocks of your choosing from an enemy’s tower.

[ please select blocks based on their number; the numbers are on the spreadsheet provided. Ex: 10.1, 3.3, etc ]

[ Add any special items here too! ]

Well then, let's see... Speaking logically, the goal is to try to remove the top of the tower piece by piece, but attack items will mess things up. Especially the peanut brittle.

[ This is... pretty high up... ]

I've, uh... n-never played this kind of game before. We can take pieces from anywhere and... put them on top?

Judging by the rules, they just seem to be removed. Presumably because putting them on top would involve them crushing us.

Oh...

[ Hm. ] We should probably save the effects for later? Maybe?

It depends on how many rounds there are, really. That being said, I suppose it doesn't matter too much since there doesn't appear to be a limit on item uses per round.

Huh . . .

[this is surprisingly strategical]

Why would one wish to break their own jaw?

Then, how do we want to play it? If we play it too safe, we'll probably attract other people's attention, but if we play too risky, people will go after us to finish us off.

Hm... W-Well, the other way is to just hit hard right away.

[ Peanut brittle... ]

Ah, no, that's... just the name of a kind of candy. Called that since it's really hard, and if you bite on it right away, well...

It sounds truly loathesome. I would rather not eat it myself.

Then we should find a balance between the two, right?

What if we take a center piece from near the bottom, and a side piece from closer to the top? That'll keep us balanced for now, and we can save our - er, pieces for the next round.

It's a type of hard candy. It's made up of multiple layers that, if bitten, can potentially damage your teeth and jaw, hence the name. Of course, it will dissolve eventually if you suck on it.

It would be better to focus on the center, as well.

It's not bad... R-Really! It's just... a candy you suck on for a long time. And there are layers to it, so the flavor changes every so often.

[Peanut brittle is incredibly broken, yeah.]

Those should not be legal to sell to children.

Well, that's why they named them "jawbreakers". The name outright tells you not to bite on them.

[ ... also delicious-looking... ]

Then...

[Let's see...]

3.2 and 10.1, maybe?

Children will dare each other to do it anyway.

Hm, well. I would prefer the peanut confection, if any of them.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 1 of 4

Gulgallana

ROUND 1

Discussion

Turn-In

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion

Re: Discussion