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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Enrahim" data-source="post: 9758923" data-attributes="member: 7025577">The as far as I can tell the argument follow the standard procedure for a test: Argument is made in fiction. Director calls for a test alongside indicating wich characteristic to use (limited to reason, intuition or presence in the context of an argument in a negotiation according to the utcome tables). Then after this the players may suggest how a skill might be aplicable. Suggesting a skill is fully optional, and the Director is free to reject any suggestion. As such if you don't immediately see any relevant skills, the aproperiate play is generally to just make the roll with just the characteristic. (Edit: DS is in general a fiction first, not a skill first system - that is you are not declaring "I use skill X to acheive Y", but rather "I try to acheve Y by doing X", and not specify any skill unless a test is caled by the director)However skill is "just" a +2. The nature of the argument changes the entire outcome table for the roll (or even can cause auto failure or success- no roll required), making this a much more important factor.(Edit: there are also as far as I can see not any limit on only use a skill once in negotiation, as opposed to in montage. Instead it is a limitation on only one attempt for each topic/approach)This is simplified to the point that of being misleading. Already at 2 you get something better than at 1 interest, and being at 1 interest is better than falling to zero. Even at 3 interest you get the main thing you are after (if you are willing to accept the catch).Moreover negotiation can go on until patience hits zero, but it is often wise to back out and get what is offered before you get to that point. Patience also drops on almost all arguments - success, failure or neutral. Only on extreme success will patience stay unchanged.</blockquote>

Verification