by blaster219 » Sun May 20, 2012 4:18 am
by Supplanter » Sun May 20, 2012 7:07 am
Rick Danger wrote:Isn't this situation already covered by the mob rules? The two enemies are the same character.
by Supplanter » Sun May 20, 2012 8:29 am
blaster219 wrote:You might consider it the "boring" option, but it does use the rules as is without modification or alteration. And if a situation can be handled by the rules already, why change them or introduce house rules?
Edit: That might have come off as more confrontational than originally intended.
by blaster219 » Sun May 20, 2012 8:42 am
Supplanter wrote:But that's not a complete solution, because of the thing people are always saying in this community about "the mechanics (should) follow the fiction." The boring option is the reverse of that: it's jamming the fiction into the shape of the mechanics.
by Supplanter » Sun May 20, 2012 8:52 am
blaster219 wrote:I don't quite agree. On the mechanics directing the fiction part that is.
blaster219 wrote:But mechanically it just feels right to me that it be an Action instead.
by Cam » Sun May 20, 2012 9:40 am
by Supplanter » Sun May 20, 2012 9:54 am
by EldritchFire » Wed May 23, 2012 9:23 am
by Battlechimp » Wed May 23, 2012 9:50 am
EldritchFire wrote:I'm re-reading the OM, and they way the section on using a reaction die is worded, I don't think you need to change anything to do what you're asking to do. it says that, "If your action fails, your opponent may spend a Plot Point (if a player) or a d6 or larger from the doom pool (if the Watcher) to create an effect, just as you would have had you succeeded on your action," OM50.
So you create an effect. It doesn't say create an effect against the one who acted against you. If a player wants to "create an effect" that says "enemy A blasts enemy B" and their reaction roll allows for it, cool. For example, if Spider-Man used his reflexes to dodge the attack I'd allow it, but if he created a web shield (durability) I would say no.