it does help thanks. As for it being irrelavant you’re right, I was doing it right but I completely forgot to consider that in my reply.
But now, clarify something for me.
A maneuver that grants a +2D or a -1D will benefit the mouse rolling in each team for the next action right?
Mice in each team can still help each other within a particular team for any given roll or help another team if it’s a result of the situation explained in page 114. If so, is it a cumulative +1D for each mouse (in which case applies in every teamwork situation) or is it a flat +1D no matter how many mice help?
Things are starting to get interesting, thanks for all your thoughtful replies.
I don’t have my book with me, but I seem to remember that it said the player only gets ONE TRY to relieve the condition. So that means it does not matter if he cooks, tries his circles, etc. Just one try. Failure meant sitting through another GM turn with the condition.
I apologize for being nitpicky here, but is it an auto-hit if vs. a Defend or not? The phrase “defending player does nothing” is bothering me… is there an instance when the defending player does something? Also, I’d like to point out questions 4a, 4b, and 4c. 4c is really bugging me.
Please tell me if I understood this correctly. A +1s gives you one more success if you managed to pass the test, but a +1D only gives you one more CHANCE of passing a test. That means a +1s makes your success a bit more sweeter, but doesn’t actually help in your chances of passing the test, but a +1D helps in those chances, correct?
Not quite. It says that conditions must be relieved in order. So Hungry must be relieved first before he can remove Angry. But what if he fails to relieve his Hunger (due to a failed test)? It says that you cannot relieve any other condition until Hungry (and Thirsty) is taken care of, and says that if you fail the test, the character remains Hungry for another GM turn. So does this mean that if he fails to relieve his Hunger, he has to sit one more GM’s turn with BOTH Hungry and Angry even though he still has checks to spend and wants to spend it to get rid of Angry?
Not really. You build your dice pool and roll. Dispo is reduced by the number of successes you roll. If you don’t roll any successes, no reduction. The defender can’t do anything.
4a. Feint vs. Attack - does this mean that the Feinter is open to attack? Does the phrase “the Feinting player may not attack or defend” mean that the Attacker automatically hits? I mean, he’s already feinting, how can he “change” his action into an attack or defend?
Attacking player rolls his dice and reduces opponent’s dispo by number of successes rolled. Feinting mouse can’t do anything.
4b. Therefore, a feint is risky only because it leaves the Feinter open to an Attack action? A Feint vs. Feint is a Versus test, so that’s okay, a Feint vs. Defend means the Feinter gets the upper hand, so that’s the only downside I can see.
Feint is bad against attacks. But great against defends. Against feints its a gamble on who’s better. Against maneuvers, you both can get hurt.
4c. What is the difference between a Feint vs. Defend (defender does not test = independent test = Ob 0) and a Feint vs. Maneuver (test Feint at Ob 0)?
Feinting player rolls and reduces defender’s dispo by successes rolled and defender can’t do anything. However, Maneuvering player gets to test his maneuver.
Compromise - Do you have to compromise if, for example, you have a disposition of 7, lost 2 points, but gained those points back later (but before the end of the conflict)?
Nope.
Please tell me if I understood this correctly. A +1s gives you one more success if you managed to pass the test, but a +1D only gives you one more CHANCE of passing a test. That means a +1s makes your success a bit more sweeter, but doesn’t actually help in your chances of passing the test, but a +1D helps in those chances, correct?
Almost. +1D means you get to roll an extra die. +1s means that you get to add 1 to the number of dice that come up 4-6. Effectively, +1D has a 50% chance of becoming +1s when you roll.
One test per condition per turn. So, you test in the player’s turn. But you can test in the GM’s turn if you spend the checks.
Intuitively one would think that +1s are better than +1D because you get the result you want instead of 50%, however, you should also consider the fact that if you roll the dice it’s one more chance of getting a “6” which can be turned into an additional die if you spend a fate point.
Btw I’m completely sorry for the waste of time I had some of you go through.
I hadn’t read the previous posts about conflicts and teamwork where these doubts were addressed and which basically answered a bunch of my questions.
And kudos for luke who’s amazingly patient and takes his time to answer all that again and again. I think a FAQ sticky could be posted in the forums concerning these things so it doesn’t happen again.
Once again thanks to all of you I won’t make any further mistakes.
Feint vs. Defend – Ah, I get it. “Defender does not test” basically says the Defender cannot do anything, since he would normally roll for defense and reduce the damage or add to his disposition.
Feint vs. Attack – A feint vs attack is like a feint vs defend. In the first case, the feinter cannot do anything versus the attack, in the second case, the defender cannot do anything versus the feint.
An excellent way to summarize things, thanks!
Exactly. +1D increases your chance to pass the test (and yes, get a 6, which can be turned into yet another die), while a +1s is basically just an increase in the Margin of Success — meaning you have to succeed first before it becomes useful.
No problem, I learned from your questions as well.
A unique feature of this forum is that they frown upon thread necromancy and as a result, they are very patient regarding pointing out older threads that answer our concerns. I have yet to see a reply stating “use the search function,” which just goes to show how patient everyone is with newbies like us.
Mea culpa. I’d forgotten that teams help each other if both choose simultaneous versus or independent actions, and I was misremembering parts of this thread and another one.
The thing that has always confused me about the conflict rules is why the verbiage for Feint vs Defend is different than the verbiage for Attack vs Feint.
Why does the Feint vs Defend text say “Defender may not test” but the Attack vs Feint text say “Feinter may not attack or defend”? Obviously, the Feinter is not attacking or defending, since he attempted a feint, and what the rules actually mean here is that the Feinter may not test, right?
Yes, all that different wording is making things confusing, especially for non-native English speakers. I’m having a lot of questions and gray areas as I read the book, most of which are due to the wording having “possibly” more than one meaning so I have to come here and clear things up and ask “what did you mean when you said [this]?”
The good side to all this, though, is the patience and support of this community and by Luke — I come here with questions and leave with answers, and sometimes even with more (er, by more, I mean more ideas)!
