DoW tied action rolls - Obfuscate/Incite

Hoping for some help on how to deal with tied rolls (barring use of a Call-on trait) when scripting Obfuscate vs anything, and also when scripting Incite vs. Feint.

First, in an effort to simplify this in my brain, I’m going to present the following shorthand. If this is all correct, someone please just say so and I’ll quit sweating the particulars: In a versus test with the following…
…player scripting Obfuscate gets a net 2 successes more than their opponent, their opponent’s next action is at +1 ob.
… player scripting Obfuscate gets a net 1 success more than their opponent, their opponent loses their action.
…tied roll, nothing happens. Neither side’s action takes effect.
…opponent to the player scripting Obfuscate gets a net 1 success, that opponent gets a +1D to their next action.

Maybe this is all just obvious (again, if I got it right, feel free to ignore the rest of this), but I wanted to make sure I was thinking about it correctly, so what follows is the long and tortured path to the above…

First, I’m assuming that generally a tie means “nothing happens!” However, one piece of description in DoW had me wondering. Avoid the Topic describes that, against both Incite and Obfuscate, a tied roll on the versus test results in the Incite or the Obfuscate having no effect. However, Rebuttal makes note that in a versus test against Obfuscate, the player scripting Rebuttal must get MORE successes than their opponent to “fully defend” against the action (seeming to suggest that the tie went to the one scripting Obfuscate, at which point they’d only need 1 net success to give their opponent a +1 ob next round). HOWEVER, then it occurred to me that, of course the player would need more successes to get past Obfuscate. EVERY versus test requires you to get more successes than your opponent.

Having sufficiently twisted myself in knots, I decided to ask your all to check my math.

Any insight would be much appreciated.

Thanks!!!

Hi, we play in this way:
you are talking about a versus test, so defender wins when the test is a tie result. So vs point and dismiss (attack actions) obfuscate doesn´t need extra successes to win, the victim of this tactic loses his current action. Apply extra successes as described by text, +1 ob next opponent action. Versus other defense actions, tie means nothing happens, but apply rebuttal description effect: To fully defend against an Obfuscate action, you must get more defense successes than your opponent´s Obfuscate successes… so if you tie, you lose and obfuscate wins. The case of avoid its quite similar but diferent result: If Obfuscate or Incite successes aren´t reduced to zero, then the incoming action wins and takes effect. So, in tie, Avoid wins vs obfuscate. Finally, against special verval actions act as effect describes. Feint, tie versus obfuscate means you lose as described. Incite, tie versus obfuscate means you lose because obfuscate is a defensive action.

Thanks for the reply, Vognar!

I will confess that when it comes to BW rules (and most everything else as well), I tend to over-complicate things. The scheme as I laid it out in my original post (hereinafter “Process 1”) was an effort to play against type in that regard. Your approach (hereinafter “Process 2”) would seem to work out as follows (modeling this off of my description of Process 1 in my original post): In a versus test with the following…
…player scripting Obfuscate gets a net 2 successes more than their opponent, his or her opponent’s next action is at +1 ob and the opponent loses his or her current action.
… player scripting Obfuscate gets a net 1 success more than their opponent, his or her opponent EITHER (1) has his or her next action at a +1 ob (if the opponent scripted Point, Dismiss, Feint (if I’m understanding your post correctly), Incite (again, if I’m reading your post correctly) or Rebuttal) and the opponent loses the current action, OR (2) the opponent merely loses his or her action (if the opponent scripted Avoid the Topic).
…tied roll, neither side’s action takes effect.
…opponent to the player scripting Obfuscate gets a net 1 success, that opponent gets a +1D to his or her next action.

So, again, I want to make sure I’m reading your post correctly - in Process 2, the approach of “ties mean the defender win” dictates that the Obfuscate is ALWAYS the defender EXCEPT against Avoid the Topic. Also, while I only tangentially referenced it in the post, there’s a similarly open question regarding Incite vs. Feint. In such a situation, which action is considered the “defender?” If there is a tie, does that suggest that the Feint takes effect (which makes little sense, since there is no “margin of success” to deduct from your opponent’s BoA) or that Incite does? Neither strikes me as a particularly obvious “defender” to whom can be granted the win if there’s a tie.

If Process 1 has any virtue, it’s that (1) it’s simple and uniform regardless of what is scripted against it (ties mean nothing happen; one net success means the opponent’s action doesn’t take effect; two net successes put the opponent at +1 ob for their next action), (2) it’s similar to Fight! (wherein ties on a versus roll result in nothing happening for either side) and (3) it avoids needing to parse which is the “defensive” action and which is the “offensive” action.

All that said, I COULD see an argument for a “Process 3,” wherein regardless of what is scripted against it, ties against obfuscate means nothing happens, and 1 net success for the player scripting Obfuscate puts the opponent at a +1 ob for the following action. ('cause I hadn’t over-complicated this enough…)

I can HAPPILY accept that Process 2 is the WWBWHQD answer (though, again, I could use some clarity on ties for Feint vs. Incite), or that Process 1 or Process 3 is the way to go - I just want to make sure I’ve got it down pat ('cause there’s plenty more interesting things to think about in-game…).

Thanks again!

Sigh - ever miss a sentence in the book that answers all your questions, then feel sufficiently stupid that you’re compelled to share said feeling in a public forum?

Page 26 - "If one character is an aggressor by intent and one is a defender, ties go to the defender. [What follows is the sentence I mised…] If both characters are aggressors, a tie means that neither side has gained an edge and they are deadlocked. Either the tie must be accepted as the result, a trait must be called on to break it or the contest must be continued in another arena. "

I withdraw my questions. :grin:

2 Likes