Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6561021" data-attributes="member: 177">It is not explicitly stated, but it is actually pretty much required by the logic.  Check out page 23 of the FAE.  They say:1) First box can absorb 1, second box can absorb two, third box can absorb three, etc.2) You can only check *one* box for a given hit, and you cannot check a box that is already checked.3) You can check a box and also take one or more consequences on a given hit.4) If you cannot absorb the stress by checking a box and/or taking consequences, then you are Taken Out.By (2), boxes are clearly either checked, or not checked.  There is no "check off part of a box".If you take N stress, and your N box is full, you certainly cannot check off your N-1 box without also taking a consequence, as the N-1 box cannot absorb N stress.This leaves the only question being, can the N+1 box be used to absorb N stress, if your N box is already checked.  While I can see how having it stated explicitly that you can would be nice, it seems adequately covered by (1).  And that, really, is all rolling up is.They define the Stress mechanic on page 23, and Bad Guys on page 38, using the terminology from the earlier page.  Unless they *give* a new definition, the old one still holds.  Beyond there being no reason to question - in a work that is clearly written for brevity.  Repeating what should be obvious is about the opposite of what you should expect form the FAE authors.</blockquote>

Verification