[TSOY] Confused about Changing Intentions

[Willow]

Hey there.  Recently picked up TSOY.  It's a pretty cool read, but I have problems wrapping my head around a couple of the concepts.  (And no, I'm not talking about the ridicuously inconsistent gender pronouns.)

TSOY, On Changing Intentions: Pg 38
In any free-and-clear stage, a player can announce that she is changing his character's intentions completely...she does not have to state the new intention until the next free and clear stage.  During this volley of rolls she may only make a defensive action.

TSOY, On Defensive Actions: Pg 37
There is one other type of action, the defensive action. You can use a relevant innate ability (Endure, React, Resist) to resist what's happening to your character...

TSOY, Example of Bringing Down the Pain: Pg 46
"I'm changin my intention.  Gael's just going to high-tail it, trying to avoid danger...they roll, his Dash now versus her Sneak.

Ok, I don't get it.  Gael wants to change his intention from looking for Emily to running away from whatever's out there.  Why does he get his dash roll that round, instead of having to roll (say React) to defend against possible Harm from Emily?

When Matt (Gael) and Emily later change intentions in the same conflict, they both clearly spend rounds defending against their opponent- why is this example an exception?

[coffeestain]

Willow,

It's in error.  You've got the right idea, otherwise.  This example has been confusing for a number of folks.  I think it might have been a carry-over from 1st edition, if I remember correctly.

Don't forget that there is an exception, however.  If you have perpendicular actions and you both roll the same result, both parties may immediate change their intentions without the need for defensive actions.

Regards,
Daniel

[Eero Tuovinen]

That whole matrix of BDTP action types has in my experience been the most confusing part of the rules for new players. My way around this is to revamp the whole explanation: instead of first explaining opposing vs. parallel actions and then going into defensive action, I do it like this:

"There are two axles of effect for any BDTP action: you have to decide whether your action will be opposing or parallel towards your opponent's action (whether your successes are deducted from each other or not), and whether your action will cause damage or bonus dice for the next round. The combination of opposing+bonus dice can only be achieved with one of the three passive skills; should you choose this special combination, you also get to change your overall goal for the conflict."

In effect, I break down the opposing vs. parallel, the defensive action, changing intent and the support action into two separate issues of whether successes are deducted and whether you're doing damage. I find that this makes it much easier to understand for the players, as they can figure out which mechanical effect components they want first, before thinking about what their characters are doing. As a bonus, this tends to school players who are keen to use the defensive and support actions; I've found that the rulebook standard way of explaining the rules relegates these options into the margins, and it takes a long while for the players to even consider them.