[sorcerer] little conflict resolution problem

[Hisho]

Ok, I have a little problem with a conflict I had in my mind, maybe the answer is easy but I don't get it at the moment.

Let's take 3 persons and a combat round

Character A wants to kill Character B with his axe, sword... whatever

Character B wants to use Character C as a shield against Character A

Character C who was grabbed by Character B the round before, wants to flee from him

my problem is, what exactly happens when the dice come up with "B" acting first, then "A" and last is "C"

A's intention is to hit and kill B but his action is not only succesfull but also changes the intent of A because he would hit C...

I got a dice diagramm like this

B action is opposed by C and vice versa
A action is opposed by what...?

I can't find an answer... yesterday I searched for it but maybe the answer is already here in the forum and I just overread it...

Michael K.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Michael,

Easy as pie. What you need to get through your head is that none of the stated intentions may be changed, except to abort it in order to conduct a sudden defense.

No changing of Stated Intent to Another, Previously Unstated Intent. Ever.

Here's what happens. B does indeed try to hold C up to shield himself from A. Let's say he succeeds. Record the victories of this roll.

Now A's attack comes in, and remember, it's coming in at B, not at C. The way I'd handle it is this: the victories from B's first roll get added to his defensive roll. Let's say it succeeds. Now, the victories of that roll become potential damage to C, which he has to deal with as an unexpected attack.

C now has a choice: either abort his upcoming attempt to get away from B's hold, in order to use full dice to defend, or face all these sudden attack dice with one little die.

What happens next depends greatly on all those choices. Let's say, to keep it simple, that C defends with a single die and (glory be!) beats the new attack. Now C has all his dice to use to try to escape B's hold. Properly narrated, he might even be able to use his (single) victory from the previous roll as a bonus die for the escape.

Easy. What's the question again? Wait, let me anticipate.

What if B fails his "shield myself" roll against C? Wouldn't he shift to full defense or something like that?

Answer: nope; that would be a new action. His "shield myself with C" fails. He does have his full dice to defend against A (having taken his own action in turn already), and he still has C grabbed, but C is not in the way of A's attack.

All right, change the order. What if C goes first and gets away? Wouldn't B do something else?

Same answer: nope. B is left grabbing empty air. And in this case, if A's attack comes in next, then obviously he'll abort the (now meaningless) action and go with full defense dice.

How does all that work? Starting to make sense? I think the important point is that you can always use the victories from any successful roll as a sort of "new roll" right in the middle of everything else. I try to get at that concept with the dice diagrams in Sex & Sorcery.

Best,
Ron

[Hisho]

Here's what happens. B does indeed try to hold C up to shield himself from A. Let's say he succeeds. Record the victories of this roll.

Now A's attack comes in, and remember, it's coming in at B, not at C. The way I'd handle it is this: the victories from B's first roll get added to his defensive roll. Let's say it succeeds. Now, the victories of that roll become potential damage to C, which he has to deal with as an unexpected attack.

C now has a choice: either abort his upcoming attempt to get away from B's hold, in order to use full dice to defend, or face all these sudden attack dice with one little die.

Ok, just to clear things up...

B tries to shield himself with C and that with 2 victories, now we get to his defensive roll against A (that would be his stamina + the 2 victories that carry over... right?)

Bs roll succeds against As attack with 2 victories... now C is not damaged by A (at least in terms of the system) but by Bs victories.

If As weapon would be a sword (edged weapon) C would get 2 lasting penalties + 2 for the next round if he decides to suck it up and looses without any victories...

I got it... the whole day this problem was wandering around in my head... I always tried to turn As victories, and there are none, into damage against C... well, now this whole scene makes sense to me...

thx
Michael K.

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

B tries to shield himself with C and that with 2 victories, now we get to his defensive roll against A (that would be his stamina + the 2 victories that carry over... right?)

Right.

Bs roll succeds against As attack with 2 victories... now C is not damaged by A (at least in terms of the system) but by Bs victories.

Wait, wait, this isn't damage yet, it's just an attack against C. He gets a chance to defend against it, as per the regular rules.

If his defense fails, then he takes damage.

If As weapon would be a sword (edged weapon) C would get 2 lasting penalties + 2 for the next round if he decides to suck it up and looses without any victories...

That's if his defense roll fails against A's sword, and if A gets two victories against that defense roll.

Also, don't say next round, say next action. C still has his action this round, and that's what gets penalized for four dice total.

Best,
Ron

[Hisho]

wait a moment... I will go through it step by step, now with numbers

ok, so into example-land

Character A wants to kill Character B with his sword

Character B wants to use Character C as a shield against Character A

Character C wants to flee B's grib

the rolls:

A: 6,5,5,2
B: 8,8,6,2
C: 5,4,2

B's action happens first with 2 victories against C
Then A's attack is coming and B defends with
4 dice (his stamina) + 2 dice (the victories against C)

B's defence roll: 9,8,6,5,4,4

2 victories against A's roll to attack

so far so good... what now?

Do I use B's defence roll as an attack against C now or do I have to roll again? If yes, with how many dice?

sorry for the step by step approach,

thx for the help so far. I will be back in 15 hours or so... at the moment I'm to tired to go on. My first game will be saturday so there is still enought time to get it into my head :)

Michael K.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Michael,

Your next step is to deal with the "blow-over" of A's attack on B. B has successfully evaded it, in part by seizing C (and he was lucky enough to beat out both A and C in trying to do this).l

Take those two victories which are currently just sitting there, from B's defensive roll vs. A's attack. They are a whole "new action" of their own. You should now roll them as an attack on C. Let's say they are a vicious 10 and 10.

C is standing there in B's grip, and his three escape-from-B dice are sitting there, ready to be used right now. The player knows that if he takes any damage from this incoming attack, the damage penalties will add to B's upcoming defense roll as bonuses.

Option #1: use a single die defense against the two 10's. This means that his current escape attempt against B will stand as is. B is going to have a nice solid four-die roll against his 5, 4, and 2. Also, any damage he takes (and there will be at least one victory worth if he rolls only one die) will give B bonuses to his defensive roll.

Option #2: just give up entirely on getting free from B, stay grabbed. The 5, 4, and 2 are simply aborted and forgotten. Now C has all three of his defensive dice to use against the two 10's of the incoming sword - three ain't great, but they're better than one.

Best,
Ron

[JMendes]

Hoy, :)

A: 6,5,5,2
B: 8,8,6,2
C: 5,4,2

B's action happens first with 2 victories against C

Hmmm... With those numbers, shouldn't that be 3 victories?

Cheers,

J.

[Valamir]

Nope.  What's A's highest number?  6.  How many dice does B have that beat a 6?  2.

They aren't lined up and compared like in Risk, if you might be thinking that.

[Ron Edwards]

Whoops, there is an error here. J's right.

We're talking about B's action, not A's (Ralph, you're looking at A).

B's action is opposed by C.

A: 6,5,5,2; irrelevant at the moment
B: 8,8,6,2
C: 5,4,2

B does succeed against C with three victories, not two. That means his defensive roll against A's attack will have three bonus dice, not two.

Let's not permit that to fuck up the discussion, though. What matters to me is whether Michael understands where the attack dice on C are coming from.

They must be new dice, rolled now, because they are not the actual stated/intended action of a given character. They must originate from the existing rolls (specifically, victories of successful rolls), not simply appear from the aether.

Michael, are you clear on this part?

Best,
Ron

[JMendes]

Hoy, :)

Allow me to continue in on this, as I too have some doubts regarding the resolution process.

At this time, B, having already resolved his action, must roll new dice to defend against A's action. At the same time, C may (and probably will) abort his action and roll new dice to defend against the collateral three-die attack.

Is this correct?

Also, I know it's not really that important, but who gets to roll those three dice? I assume B, since the dice come from B's victories.

Cheers,

J.

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

J, you're correct on the first point. B's defense against A occurs right on schedule. As just clarified, he gets a three-die bonus, which puts him, I believe, at seven dice total.

On the second point, maybe you and Michael are suffering from the same misconception; you guys don't yet seem to get that the amount of dice in the incoming roll against C has not yet been established. It is NOT the same as those three dice just mentioned.

If B's defense against A is successful, then whatever victories it garnered are applied as the attack on C.

Let's say B rolls 9, 6, 5, 3, 3, 2, 2 on his seven dice. Crappy roll, but it still beats A's attack, so B is not skewered or slashed by A's sword. It beats A's attack by one measly victory.

That means that the new attack (actually, blow-over) on C is one measly die. That's what C has to make his decision about (abort his attempt to escape, or not).

Let's say, alternately, that B rolls 10, 10, 9, 9, 9, 8, 2. Wow! Six victories against A's sword-attack! Yay for B! Again, he's not hurt. What this means, though, is that poor C is now facing a six-die attack, and this time, he sure damn better abort his attempt to escape.

Understood?

1. B's roll vs. C's defensive roll (which we are all assuming was a one-die roll which fails)

2. B's roll to defend against A, using victories from #1 as bonuses

3. Victories from #2 become an attack on C, which C has to decide about

As for who rolls, it doesn't matter. I'd say either the GM or the player of B.

Best,
Ron

[Hisho]

Hi, oh yep... made a mistake with the victories... sorry :)

so the final damage C receives comes from B's attack roll that originates from his succesfull action (using C as a shield) and defending against A.

I thougth I had to re-roll A's attack or something like that, now I know were my problem was. Some rolls can generate new rolls mid-round... but the initial stated intend will not be changed.

active action, defence, active action... and so on... up to the point were every stated intend is resolved. It's like tennis or something like that...

maybe my problem was that I was still thinking in terms of attack as an attack... and not an action that is happening in the story.

thx
Michael K.

[Ron Edwards]

Everyone gets that the new attack on C is a wholly new roll, right? In my examples, either one die or six?

In general, it's best to consider these "new rolls" to be sub-routines of the fundamental rolls that define the round. They will only be generated through victories of the successful rolls. Defenses against them are handled as normal. The sub-routines will never contradict the fundamental order of the round.

Best,
Ron

[Hisho]

Everyone gets that the new attack on C is a wholly new roll, right? In my examples, either one die or six?

yes, got that...

My problems are solved for now... friday evening I will have my first session of sorcerer and thereafter I will try to write it up as an actual play thread

thx for the help
Michael K.

[JMendes]

Hey, :)

Yeah, I pretty much got everything you wrote, except there is just one minor detail that is keeping me confused...

1. B's roll vs. C's defensive roll (which we are all assuming was a one-die roll which fails)

I was under the impression that, since C's action so directly opposes B's action, C's original roll was to be counted as a defense against B.

With this last statement, you seem to be implying that C must indeed select between trying to not be used as a shield (with more conviction that a simple 1-die try) and actually trying to escape. Is that correct?

Cheers,

J.