[Circle of Hands] Shields, Axes and advantage die (and a quarterstaff too)

[Callan S.]

So it's actually: whether advantage is determined by the GM, but if a shield basher hits person B who has advantage, now anyone who hits B takes that advantage off them if they pass the roll? If in melee/close combat with them. Sounds cool (whether it's the rule or not). That would mean the shield basher would have to make a second successful attack to take the advantage off them?

Just a side note, I get that there's the world as it exists in three pounds encased in a skull across the table from me and it is indeed it's own imaginative world. I'm not trying to distract from or spoil that by looking at the written rules. I get that the rich part of play is in the flow of that imaginative world - so no beatig me up for figuring out the text part! :) It's feedback - maybe if I don't get it, someone else wont (then again maybe it's just me and I accept that is possible)

[Ron Edwards]

Hey Callan, you weren't the target for that broadside. You're doing fine.

I'm not quite sure you get the advantage die, so I have to ask - you realize that it applies to every clash, right? It's not like there's a single advantage die on the table and only one character in the whole mess gets to have it.

Reassure me that you're not thinking that and I'll continue from there.

[Callan S.]

Ron - that's good to hear! Anyway I've been thinking it's kind of like +2 to hit in other game systems for 'height advantage' or such - ie, several people might have advantage in the one melee, or none, even (however it kind of seems to the GM)? And the shield basher might not start out with advantage.

[John W]

So, to put it in the language of physics, Advantage is NOT conserved, like energy or charge is.  I don't know if that helps anyone but me. :)

Advantage is an ephemeral thing; in the game space, it doesn't exist outside of clashes.  You can think of it this way: each clash "creates" an Advantage die, which goes to one character; once the clash is resolved, that Advantage die disappears.  When A shield-bashes B, he doesn't "take" Advantage from B; it doesn't matter whether B had Advantage before he was shield-bashed.

A shield-bashes B and does damage.  There is no gaining, losing or transference of Advantage.  Then, in the next clash involving B, whether it's with A or C, the GM (as always) decides who has Advantage in this clash, and thinks: "B just got shield-bashed, so [A or C] will have the Advantage this time."  The connection between the shield-bashing and this next clash is not mechanical, it is only based on our memory of the shield-bashing.

In all of the above, I'm talking about the game space, and "Advantage" the game mechanic.  In the fictional space, on the other hand, a shield-bash certainly creates an advantage for B's attackers, in the form of B is now dizzy or off balance or off his feet.  In other words, it puts B at a disadvantage.  That's a real "change of state," to return to the language of physics.

-J

[Moreno R.]

Add to this the rule about losing the next action if you attack in a clash: probably it's not in your interest to "waste" your following action to attack at a disadvantage. It's probably in your interest to do it when you have the advantage. So: suck people into clash when you have the advantage, and avoid clashing with people when you don't and if you get sucked into one, try do avoid getting hurt and get out of there.

Because, literally (by the rules about clashes) "there is no thing like a fair fight".  Every clash in this game is unfair.