re RESISTANCE: When the Resistance Roll is introduced on p.6 (v6), the example is given of a particular type of roll: needing to make a preemptive resistance roll when an enemy has a big advantage, before you can attempt your own action. The illustration is crossing blades with a Swordmaster: “she disarms you before you can strike.”
When Resistance is more thoroughly explained on p.11, it implies that the roll is made “to resist a consequence.” The preemptive use of a Resistance roll gets no further mention. I’m trying to reconcile the two notions. Using the Swordmaster example, does a PC pay (potentially) several points of stress to avoid the consequence of getting disarmed before the duel even begins in earnest? Is this simply the mechanic the GM uses “to reflect the capabilities of especially dangerous foes” (p.6)?
Thank you in advance of a response.
Search the pdf for “initiative.” I thought in the section on NPCs it talked about how NPCs who are badass, or who have the PCs at a disadvantage, can get the “initiative” and cause these preemptive consequences.
In a sense, the “initiative” is also a form of consequence — it’s just a consequence of the fiction instead of the consequence of a bad roll. If the fiction dictates A Bad Thing Should Happen To A PC, then that PC can make a resistance roll to reduce its severity. This is allowed whether the Bad Thing was the result of a botched roll or just circumstance or dumbness.
“I grab the fire!” –> “You get burned!” –> “I resist!” –> “You get burned less, and you just blew a bunch of stress. Nice job, sucka.”