help with IaWA
Noclue:
On rereading, my example's not as clean as I would like because Tom got the advantage die in the previous round and is only "keeping it" after his answer. I still don't see where it clearly says in the text that you have to wait until the next round to use the advantage die in a multiple party conflict. The text merely states:
Quote
•If your roll’s less than your challenger’s, but more
than half, you lose the advantage: roll forward, and
your challenger gets an advantage die (or you can
negotiate consequences here, too).
•If your roll matches or beats your challenger’s,
but not by double, you win the advantage: you roll
forward and you get an advantage die (or you can
negotiate consequences here, too).
From the words "roll forward" I infer that you get the advantage die from that point forward, not in the next round, though I may be wrong.
lumpley:
I've played it both ways. Both ways work fine.
I believe that the text more strongly supports the "don't roll your advantage die until next turn" interpretation, but you should go with whichever interpretation makes more sense to you personally.
-Vincent
lumpley:
Oh, and sure, a third party can roll into an action sequence after round 1.
-Vincent
Paul T:
Vincent,
Interesting! I hadn't taken either of those things from the text. I'll have to try them. For clarification:
1. If joining an ongoing action sequence, are you still bound by the "three rolls" rule? Like, if I join in the third round, does that mean one roll for me will settle things for certain, no going on to a future round?
2. If you're assigning advantage dice _immediately_, to the next roll as opposed to the next round, do you indeed "lose" it when you roll lower than another Challenge or Answer?
My interpretation was that you get an advantage die in the next round, no matter what, as long as you won at least one exchange in a given round. Is that how you play, too?
Finally, I have something other than questions to contribute:
About Answers and Challenges, and who gets to say what, I have gathered from an earlier conversation with Vincent is that it's a consensual process. So:
1. The Challenger should name who he or she expects to Answer, because that helps clarify the intents of her action. By naming who's answering me, I communicate more clearly to the group what my action entails. ("Oh, the baker has to Answer, too? I see what you mean...")
2. If you weren't included in that list, but feel like your character would interfere, you should speak up, though. The Challenger's list of Answerers isn't writ in stone; if you would and can interfere, you'll get to Answer, too.
I hope that helps. (Vincent, let me know if I read you wrong earlier, however.)
lumpley:
1. If you're joining an action sequence already underway, it still goes only 3 rounds. You don't extend it.
2. Yeah, that's how I play too.
About who answers: right on.
-Vincent
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page