When adding up how many dice get rolled in a test, gear always adds +1D. In a fight conflict, a weapon should always be considered gear, shouldn’t it? And as I read it, this would be in addition to the special dice adjustments for different weapons. So a sword would get +1D as gear, and another +1D for Versatile.
Questions:
[ol]
[li]If this is incorrect, is there a place in the rules that says weapons are not gear, or that the special weapon bonuses supersede the normal handling of gear?
[/li][li]Also, if weapons are not gear, and therefore don’t grant any bonuses in many situations, I wouldn’t mind hearing some justification of that. What I mean is, bonus dice should be tied to roleplay. Why roleplay having a sword if it doesn’t affect the outcome of an action?
[/li][/ol]
I think weapons can be gear outside conflicts, if situation demands. But in a conflict it don’t grant any additional bonus die. Why should be? Without a sword you can’t even kill that guy.
The action, the outcome and the game itself is about roleplaying. Roleplaying affects everything. Conflicts has its own internal logic, and you must to play with that.
Can you please indicate where in the rules you’ve found this?
I can’t quite understand what you wrote, but you seem to be saying that there’s no reason a sword should grant a bonus, and that weapon use should be roleplayed even though there aren’t any mechanical effects. I don’t think that’s a defensible opinion. By that reasoning, all the rules could be thrown out - there’s no reason to have any mechanical effects for anything. Just roleplay it, right?
Further, I’d prefer if you provided some kind of rules reference to back up your statements. Where do you read that weapons don’t work as gear in conflicts?
Pg. 35 “Gear that’s relevant to a problem adds +1D to your roll or gives benefits according to the special conflict rules described in the Resolution chapter.”
Pg. 117 “In conflicts, gear behaves a little differently than it does against basic obstacles. It doesn’t give a flat bonus die to your rolls. Instead, your gear has qualities that can help with specific actions or particular conditions.”
Page 35: “Gear that’s relevant to a problem adds +1D to your roll or gives benefits according to the special conflict rules described in the Resolution chapter.” Note the “or.” Weapons are gear for fight and fight animal conflicts. Pages 117 to 123 give examples of gear for different types of conflicts. Not all conflict gear is a physical object (e.g. a promise in an argument of speech conflict—page 120).
Although I admit it rankles me with all the ways conflict tests work differently than non-conflict tests. I don’t see any sense in that. There’s no design reason why everything in a conflict should be a special exception from the normal test rules.
I think a better way of asking my original question is whether the game is balanced for that additional +1D or not. I didn’t advocate dropping all the special bonuses, and bumping up the balance level by +1D doesn’t change the functionality of the game at all - except of course by making all test mechanics more consistent
The requirement of characters to both pass and fail tests in order to advance their skills tempers the appeal of any mechanical advantage. Using traits against oneself in order to earn checks for the Players’ Turn creates a similar disincentive to mustering dice.
R., has players succeeding all the time been a problem in your games?
Not that I disagree with keeping things difficult. But using “counts as gear” doesn’t make things easier, because it only applies in conflicts, and all sides benefit equally. It’s mainly about conceptualization. If you’re using a weapon in a fight, it should add a die. If it doesn’t add a die, you might as well not have it.
I’m curious about this question though. Outside of conflicts, weapons would definitely count as gear in all appropriate tests, and inside conflicts you only count the first roll. So it doesn’t seem like a very big change to the pass/fail ratio. Unless you mean succeeding too well at conflicts, and not having to compromise? I have played about half of games with “counts as gear” and half without, and I haven’t seen this happen. I wouldn’t expect it to.
Do you have a page reference for this? If my character is making a versus test to fight a snake, I can take +1D gear bonus for his spear. If my character and the snake are in a fight animal conflict, I can take +1D every time I choose the maneuver action.
EDIT: Or, do you mean counting the first roll towards advancement?
I’m having trouble following you last few posts. Would you mind restating your question? Are you still asking whether or not the advantage of characters using gear is accounted for in factoring obstacles?
As I read it, it works as follows:
During a conflict, weapons grant the bonus(es) described in the weapon description.
During a non-conflict obstacle, a weapon (being gear) may (if appropriate) grant a +1D bonus.
For example, if you’re having a simple obstacle to intimidate some bystanders into leaving the scene of an ‘incident’, drawing your sword could grant +1D to the check. You’re using the sword as gear to appear more intimidating, but you’re not actually involved in a full-blown conflict with the bystanders. On the other hand, if you’re making a simple check to cook a rice dinner for a group of mice on the road, your sword isn’t appropriate, and therefore won’t grant any bonus dice.
