Some thoughts on a team in a conflict

In preparation of my new MG campaign (starts next week), I had a thought about how a team works in conflict. Let us say there are three members on of a team. The rulebook states “Three players each get one action out of a set of three.” (pg 113) and that “You’re free to shuffle around the order in which players take actions each time you choose, but no player on a team can take two actions in a row.” Then it says says “Decide who is leading the action for the team and making the test before the GM reveals his action.”

So my real question is, when does the GM know the player order. Do the players choose the order they will act in a round and then announce it? Thus the GM can think to himself “Well Johnny has an axe, he will probably attack, I best not play a feint.” Or is it best if the GM chooses all his actions, and then lets the players talk out how they want to act this round so that he does not know the order of their actions/characters? I am leaning towards the second options (less gaming the system), but how do people play it.

The GM always chooses his actions first, before they players decide which actions they’ll take and what order they’ll take them in (see the Procedures list on page 97). Of course, if you’ve already played through a set of three actions, the GM does know which character won’t go first, which is often useful information.

I’d say it depends on the opposition in the conflict (the roleplay senario).

An ‘intelligent’ opponent (like a weasel, raven/crow, fox, etc.- something capable of predicting cause and effect) might be able to strategize based on the situation presented, whereas a ‘non-intelligent’ opponent (like a bullfrog, turtle, wilderness, weather, etc.) will simply take action based on instinct and not an adaptive strategy.


Thank you Thor.

My pleasure. Good gaming!