Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Grendel_Khan" data-source="post: 8417777" data-attributes="member: 7028554">Well look at this list. Extremely useful stuff here!! One question, though about the bit below (I think):So let's say there's a situation where multiple characters would be acting at once, presumably each making a different action roll, like in a combat situation. Would you typically have everyone declare, or at least float, their actions before resolving each one, therefore having various actions impact the position and effect of others? Or would you discuss and resolve each action one by one, with subsequent actions impacted by ones that came directly before?Seems like the obvious choice would be the latter, in part because otherwise it'd be awfully chaotic. But just wondering if that's the case. To be more specific, let's say a detection clock fills up, and the group is discovered by security droids. One player might want to open fire while another dives for cover, and a third tries to splice the security system to temporarily call off or power down the droids. Would it make sense in that case to consider all of those actions, and then, for example, say that the character shooting at the droids is doing a desperate action, because he's a clear hostile and drawing their fire, which in turn means the position for the ones diving for cover and splicing a panel are lower than they might otherwise be, given the droids' attention on the shooter? Or is it more sensible for the system to resolve the shooter's action first, and then the others.This point about two lesser consequences being preferable to a single big one is really really interesting. Makes total sense, and coming up with lots of consequences is the biggest challenge for me as a new FitD GM (particularly for all those 4-5 rolls), so this is a good reminder that I need to focus on building that muscle.</blockquote>

Verification