Mechanics of "No, You Idiot!" Situations

[Supplanter]

We see it all the time with highly mobile heroes. Villain to the left of her. Villain to the right of her. Villain to the left of her fires his Firing Thing. And creams the Villain to the right of her as our heroine ducks nimbly out of the way.

This came up in our game last night, and the concern was, we were pretty sure there's a rule that if you're rolling a successful reaction and buy an effect die, you can only apply stress or a complication to your attacker, not directly to a third party. Which seems entirely reasonable, but deprives one class of heroes of a signature move.

So how to handle it? Give the third party a free reaction roll? In the comics, the power of "No, You Idiot!" is that the Villain to the right is often caught flat-footed. But a free reaction roll seems like a reasonable compromise. Then, a reaction roll against whom? Presumably a "chain reaction" against the hero - hero lets her roll stand; the third party rolls to beat it. (Which opens up one further baroque possibility: the third party winning and buying an effect die against the hero . . . )

Is there an Official View? Are there ideas? (Meaning, except for ideas like, "This usually only works with mobs in the stories" - not true - or "This is really an action roll on the hero's turn and it's all in how you narrate it because This Is Not a Simulative Game" - boring. )

In the session, the situation involved Magnitude, The Incredible Hulc ("NOT THAT HULK"), Zzzaxxx, an octogenarian Electro, some power lines and (Business Master Resource) THE FINEST PORTABLE CAPACITOR MONEY CAN BUY D8. You know, the usual. Electro's walker wasn't worth any dice that scene, I note for posterity.


Jim

[EldritchFire]

• Use the effect die from the reaction as emotional stress on the attacker as he saw how he could be manipulated by the defender.
• Use the effect die as an asset on the reactor of redirected attack and declare the reactor as the next actor, so they can use the asset on their attack against the other guy.
• Just let 'em do it :p
• Other…

Just off the top of my head.

-EF

[blaster219]

We've handled it in a slightly different way that doesn't really need any adjustment in the rules. You narrate it as the hero nimbly dodging out of the way and allow the shot to hit an enemy's ally. The difference is the "attacker" is the defending hero and the "defender" is the unintentional target who makes the reaction roll. The target's reaction roll beats the hero's action total, the shot hits the enemy's intended target. If the hero wins, the shot hits the unintended target.

I've probably completely mangled that description, but I hope you get the gist.

Swapping the assumption of who the "attacker" and who the "defender" is can explain some things you see in movies. Take Avengers (pot. spoiler). During the final battle, Hawkeye fires an arrow at Loki who catches it but it surprised when the arrow explodes.

Now this could just be a cool description of a standard physical stress attack on the part of HawkEye's player.

It could also be the result of a failed "attack" by Loki. The Watcher decides to make an emotional attack on Hawkeye by having Loki catch the archer's arrow thus showing his complete and utter contempt for the mortal hero. However, Hawkeye's player gets a better Reaction roll and chooses to spend a PP turning his reaction effect die into physical stress.

[gforce1985]

If I were going to stat out such an ability, it would end up looking just like a weaker but perhaps broader version Energy Absorption, "On a successful reaction against any [STRESS TYPE] attack, use the opponent's effect die as a stunt." But I think that's a little too technical. Setting up a situation where one opponent's attack hits one of his allies requires all of you to be in just the right place at just the right time, in other words, an opportunity. Activate a Watcher character's opportunity and stunt it to say bad guy A's action knocked bad guy B off balance and opened an opportunity to bring the beatdown.

[Supplanter]

Setting up a situation where one opponent's attack hits one of his allies requires all of you to be in just the right place at just the right time, in other words, an opportunity.

Oh! Hm! he said.


Jim

[Cam]

Nice compromise there between the "activate an opportunity to use ANY reaction effect die" and "only use reaction effect die to harm acting character."

If your opponent creates an opportunity, it might be nice to spend a PP (activating the opportunity) and allow yourself a secondary target with your effect die, rather than just spend PP to use the reaction effect die. This would line up nicely with the way push vs. stunt works.

Cheers,
Cam

[Supplanter]

Nice compromise there between the "activate an opportunity to use ANY reaction effect die" and "only use reaction effect die to harm acting character."

If your opponent creates an opportunity, it might be nice to spend a PP (activating the opportunity) and allow yourself a secondary target with your effect die, rather than just spend PP to use the reaction effect die. This would line up nicely with the way push vs. stunt works.

Cheers,
Cam

Yeah, it seems pretty sweet. Also, Zzzaxxx is loose, Electro is immortal and the world is screwed, retroactively.

But that's neither here nor there! Cam, just so I understand, do you understand the "No, You Idiot" compromise, above, to cost the hero a total of 1 PP or 2 PPs? I think you mean 1, but I could be wrong.


Jim

[Grimmshade]

We've handled it in a slightly different way that doesn't really need any adjustment in the rules. You narrate it as the hero nimbly dodging out of the way and allow the shot to hit an enemy's ally. The difference is the "attacker" is the defending hero and the "defender" is the unintentional target who makes the reaction roll. The target's reaction roll beats the hero's action total, the shot hits the enemy's intended target. If the hero wins, the shot hits the unintended target.

This is how I have handled it as well. The intended Target's reaction, which he has spent a PP to use, is then directed at the secondary character, who gets a reaction roll vs the original targets reaction roll.

[blaster219]

That's not quite what I was trying to explain. Let me try and de-mangle what I was trying to get at.

Setup: Acrobat Man is flanked by a pair of goons from the Good Squad. In typical Acrobat fashion, he wants Goon A to shoot Goon B by accident.

Action: Player rolls Solo + Sneaky Ninja (Distinction) + Enhanced Reflexes + Combat and gets a 15 total and a d8 Effect for Physical Stress.

Reaction: Watcher rolls for Goon B and chooses Buddy + Goon Squad Training (distinction as a d4) + Body Armour + Combat as a reaction and gets a 10 total and a d6 for Effect.

Result: Player narrates how Goon A points gun at Acrobat Man and pulls the trigger. At the last fraction of a second, Acrobat Man nimbly Neo's his way out of the path of the bullet which strikes Goon B causing d8 Physical Stress.

No activating of opportunities, no spending PP for Counter-Effects.

This could also work with Acrobat Man causing d8 Emotional Stress to Goon A when he accidentally shoots his partner instead of causing Physical Stress to Goon B. Or spend a PP for a second effect die and do both. The Narration works for both options.

[Supplanter]

That's not quite what I was trying to explain. Let me try and de-mangle what I was trying to get at.

IOW, the option I ruled out of order in the first message in the thread?


Jim