I was wondering about something. Suppose that the referee rolls dice and decides that something happens to you. Describes everything in detail that happened, and tells you the end result. If you feel that there is a reasonable amount of time, or could be a reasonable amount of time, where you could have taken measures to counter it, you are allowed to do that, right? For example, you botch on your driving skill, drive the car into a telephone pole and verse out. If you feel that you may have had enough time to jump free of the car before it hits the telephone pole, that cancels out everything the referee just said, new dice rolls are made, and you see if you successfully jumped clear of the car before it hits the telephone pole. You then get rolls on if you survived and how badly you're injured jumping free of the car. That's the way it works, right? You're allowed to do that? I just want to be clear. This is the first game I've ever played where the players aren't allowed to read the rules first.
Taking Action.
(4 posts) (3 voices)-
Graham
MemberWell, "aren't" probably should be replaced with "are strongly discouraged". Really, the reason that referees suggest you don't read the rules first is that understanding the bias trees for each bias makes it inanely hard not to metagame, and also it preserves the feeling of experimentation and unexpected results. However, as for your main question:
Generally, in live play, the referee is supposed to ask you if there's anything you want to do while xyz is going on, or pauses long enough for you to say "Ah but" and things change from there. It seems to me that this can't really work for forum play, since the referee probably wants to get in a lengthy chunk of gameplay instead of having each post be "Something has happened. Your response?" So in short, yeah, if the referee deems that there was a significant amount of time during which you can perform some kind of action that changes the course of things, you can. At least, that's how Scott and I have always played. Though with a botch, I would think it would either be set in stone or they would ask you about actions right after you botched.
Mon Jul 21 2008 4:14 pm # -
JohnA1nut
MemberWell, "aren't" probably should be replaced with "are strongly discouraged". Really, the reason that referees suggest you don't read the rules first is that understanding the bias trees for each bias makes it inanely hard not to metagame, and also it preserves the feeling of experimentation and unexpected results.
Yeah, when Scott and I were in the gather, Scott did things with psionics that there's no way he could have thought of doing if he hadn't known the rules so well. This worked to my advantage, because his tricks got me out of more than one jam. I figured if he could do it, so could I.
Mon Jul 21 2008 7:08 pm # -
I trust that Scott was not unfairly reliant on his knowledge of the Multiverser rules, and note that although I was obviously more familiar with Multiverser rules than anyone else at the time, the Architect built many of his psionic abilities on 1) the fact that his reasoning about what would be easier happened to be consistent with what I thought on the subject and 2) the fact that he brought with him a copy of the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Psionics Handbook for reference. The latter did not give him bias level information, but did give him some insight into what might be possible and how difficult it might be.
And yes, even in live play if you believe that your character could have avoided a situation given particular acts in the available time, the clock is reset and the rolls made. The most notable of these are, "Character suddenly leaps from his hiding place and strikes, hitting you for so many intensities of damage;" "I have panoramic awareness, so his ambush must beat my awareness roll for him to surprise me;" "Roll it...you beat his ambush roll; as you are passing the alcove you become aware that someone is hiding there prepared to attack, what action do you take?"
As far as whether you could leap from the car, I think probably I would require an agility check to determine whether you were coordinated enough to let go of the wheel and get out of the vehicle under those circumstances. Just because you say you will do that doesn't mean you will succeed, particularly in a botch situation in which tension is high and time is short.
Having hit three telephone poles in my life, I can say that it never once occurred to me to leap from the vehicle. The first time I had no control of what was happening and tried the wrong thing to avoid it; the second time there was no time, as it was probably under a second between when my wheel caught the bump that pulled it sideways and when it hit the pole; the third time I had swerved to avoid the illegal immigrant Mexican driver who had cut me off by pulling out of a driveway on a fifty mile per hour back road, and did not make it back to the road in time to avoid the pole. Also, in all three cases I was wearing my seat belt, and would have had to surrender such limited control of the vehicle as I had to release that and open the door and leap into the roadway. So I am skeptical of your fix in this particular example, but I would allow you to roll for whether your reactions were fast enouth to execute it.
--M. J. Young
Mon Jul 21 2008 9:38 pm #
Reply
You must log in to post.