I have a couple of quick questions based on a game I’m involved in using Tabletop Forge on Google+ Hangout.
We had one conflict where two mice were attacking our group of four. We split into teams of two and our opponents split into teams of 1 for face off team vs. team. Then when one team was eliminated the two teams ganged up on the one. Is this correct?
Later we fought three weasels acting as one team, while we were again split into 2 equal teams. We did the bit where the weasel’s picked who they acted against while we either helped each other or not depending on whether we had both vs. or both independant, or vs and independant.
What got confusing was when each team attacked, but one team had a spear. Our group disagreed on whether the weasels would make a vs check against the party with the spear while the other party made an independant, or if the weasels were attacking the party without the spear would the spear still be a vs check, or would it then become independant.
Finally, the NPC side of the conflicts can provide each other helping dice, not just the PCs, right?
I want to respond but this site frowns on thread necro. Can you start a new thread?
The first part sounds correct.
I think the GM gets to pick who the weasels are attacking - if they attack the group with the spear, it’s vs. with the other team making an independent check. But if they attack the group without the spear it’s independent tests all around.
Yes, NPCs can help.
Those would be my answers as well. You’re all in the same conflict, so you’re free to gang up. I probably wouldn’t have split the two mice if I was GMing, but the book just says “the GM forms teams to oppose the players’ teams.”
Jimbozig, even if the weasel attacks the team without the spear, the team with the spear is still attacking it. The more I’ve thought about this, the more sense it makes to me. This is how I would run it, but if my GM runs it differently I will follow their lead.
OK, I think we’re on the same page, but just to check: assume all teams attack and the weasels target the non-spear team. The weasels and the non-spear team would have independent tests. Since the spear team is not under attack, I would think their test was independent as well.
If the weasels target the spear team, the weasels and the spear team would have a versus test and the non-spear team would have an independent action.
I found myself in a similar predicament.
First game was a train wreck. Multiple reasons why. But the main problem we ran into was managing the main conflict. The conflict consisted of a snake and 3 teams of players. What we didn’t get was why each team couldn’t take their own action against the snake instead of assisting in a versus test. Essentially, if we had all 3 teams select “Attack” as their action, they all wanted to use their weapons on the snake. However, the book clearly indicates that if the test is the same for all teams, it should be a single test done by one member of one team with the others assisting. Nobody got why that should be the case - including the GM. It just didn’t seem to relate to what would happen in the real world, therefore they didn’t know how to role play it either.
Any suggestions? I’ve been re-reading the conflict section and it hasn’t really cleared it up, yet.
The real world, teams of mice don’t attack snakes with weapons.
You played the rule correctly.
Imagine it like a comic book. The scene is broken up into panels, showing the teams in action. Each moment, one team is featured—and probably even one character in that team. That moment is described in a panel. In the background of that panel, you can see the silhouettes of the other characters, or maybe they’re not depicted at all — but we know they’re there. The action moves from team to team, panel to panel. Each character has a moment in which he or she is in the spotlight.
That’s how the multiple teams rules work. Each character gets a moment to shine while the rest of the characters/teams help.
Thanks. That helps me envision it better.
However, any suggestions on how assisting teams/characters should role play such a thing other than “I cheer on Saxon as he takes a swing with his sword!”?
Maybe we’re just not imaginative enough.
Did the helpers script Attack or Cheerleader? If they scripted attack, they they better narrate some badass attacking or they don’t get to give over with the helping dice.
Correct. The description of help must be as valid as the description of an action. If it’s not, the help doesn’t count and the extra die can’t be rolled.
We ran into a strange situation last night in a chase against some bandits. There are two teams in the patrol, and two teams of bandits:
Patrol A: Feint
Patrol B: Attack
Bandits A: Defend
Bandits B: Attack
Patrol A feints targeting the defending bandits. Patrol B and Bandits B both make independent tests against one another. What happens if the defending bandits target Patrol B?
Do they roll to recover disposition? Or does getting beat by the feint negate their defense? Or are they forced to help the other bandits because both are effectively making independent tests?
A follow-up question: when do you choose targets in multiteam conflicts? Does everyone choose a target when they script their actions? Or are targets chosen after everyone’s action is on the table?
It looks like the simplest answer is that the two groups paired off, resulting in Attack/Attack and Feint/Defend.
Choose your targets so that everything makes sense, both in the fiction and in the game. You do not choose when you choose your action.
The way I think of it is that during a fight you would pair off if you were in multiple groups. It you tried to switch targets then the group you were fighting would get easy shots at you.
Sure, but MG doesn’t want to be that tactical or punishing. It’s hard enough to get ahead without worrying which way you’re facing, you know?