I just ran a heist one shot for my group and we had a blast. However one rule tripped us up.

I just ran a heist one shot for my group and we had a blast. However one rule tripped us up.

I just ran a heist one shot for my group and we had a blast. However one rule tripped us up.

They chose to pull an infiltration job, so there was a lot of prowling. Likely they had a lurk to take point on these stealthy moves. But when she took that lead the group action, we got confused. The rules say when they take that action, each character rolls for the action and the group takes the highest result. The first problem we saw was that some of the characters had no traits in prowl, so they had zero dice to roll. I figure that means that the lurk would have to just take a stress for each of them to cover for their foybles, but that was not clear in the rules. The second problem we saw was that there was no reason the lurk needed to lead the prowl action. In fact a character with no prowl traits would be just as good at leading it since the lurk would also get to roll and just wouldn’t have to take stess. This seems counter intuitive to me. Logically I imagine that the most skilled character would lead group actions in a check and that would be re-enforced by a bonus to the group. The second time the lurk lead a team prowl I just had each character use the lurks prowl trait. I know that is probably a bit much, but it felt better to the players than the first roll.

So, how is this intended to work? Did we miss something? How can it work better? I would appreciate any insights you guys have. Thank you.

10 thoughts on “I just ran a heist one shot for my group and we had a blast. However one rule tripped us up.”

  1. Yep zero dot means, 2d and taking the worse one.

    I think to prevent the randomnes of who leads, its better to fail as a group action if the leader fails.

    Or is that too hard? Any thoughts in tjis Andrew Shields ?

  2. Yeah, the reason you want the skilled person to lead is because in that situation (lead a group action) the whole group succeeds or fails based on the roll of the leader alone. Everyone else is just rolling to see whether or not they contribute stress to the leader.

    So, if you have a skilled person who is not in the lead rolling, then that person may be good at not contributing stress. But if the leader fails and/or accumulates complications, the whole group has to cope with that.

  3. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t you take the best result of the group?

    So somebody with only one die may roll up a 6, and help pull the leader’s already successful roll into Critical territory, right?

  4. Yes and no. For one, you are right and I am wrong; the best result rolled in the group is the one you keep. So, actually, there is no reason to have the most skilled person take the lead.

    However, the best single result is what you keep. So, if someone rolls 2 or more 6 results that’s a critical, but you would not combine 6 from one person and 6 from another to make a new hybrid result.

    Glad you brought this up, I was doing it against the rules. =p

  5. Still that sounds a bit off or? I have played it like the rules yet. But it also makes it saved for any lesser to succeed at the costs of stress.

    And to let a character with zero stress but for example zero prowl leads is a bit whacky

  6. Josephe Vandel Yes, that does seem odd. For me it made sense for the person in the lead to roll for the group, but if ANYONE’s success counts, then that’s different.

  7. If only the lead rolls, group actions become punitive. Groups will choose to roll individually bogging down play.

    If we think of “on point” as leading the narrative action that rotates between players instead of literally leading the physical action, then it makes more sense.

  8. Christopher Rinderspacher Where I misunderstood is that everyone would roll, but only the lead’s roll counted as success for the action. The other rolls were to see whether other people contributed stress, or did not contribute stress. So, their success was in making leadership less stressful.

    That way it is only punishing if people roll poorly–and even if they do, the lead can have a success for the group (at the price of multiple stresses.) And there is a chance that even with 2 dice pick the lower, a non-helpful person can at least pull their weight and not cause stress.

Comments are closed.