So, we’ve had about six sessions of play (8-9 heists) and we have realy started to get the flow of the system. The session before last the Entanglements started to drive the story. As en entanglement, one of their contacts had been roughed up by some Severosi revolutionaries and while they showed’em who’s boss, Ulf Ironborn took their gambling den.
To the question: Does taking out tougher NPC’s need to be considered a complex action (countdown clocs) or are they taken out by one lucky stab but the positioning determines the rolls (desperate, fewer dice etc)?
I seem to remember reading something in the rules suggesting tougher enemies can have clocks. I definitely would use them. You might also need multiple clocks for different stages (e.g. First to make vulnerable, second to eliminate).
You wouldn’t take away action dice. Instead, there are a bunch of layers and sliders you can bring into play to make a boss fight.
1. The preemptive action: Ulf (or whoever) is that much more skilled that they take the initiative, and the PC has to resist Ulf’s action first.
2. The clock(s): If Ulf sees them coming, his guard may be up (a clock for “vulnerable” like Jason said). In the fiction, maybe he’s good enough that the PCs have to batter him and tire him out before they can deliver the killshot. This is just a pacing mechanism to draw out the conflict, make room for more results than “you killed him” and to possibly tax the PCs on stress and harm due to repeated rolls.
3. Positioning: Even in a one-shot kill kind of contest, a desperate position will make the roll exciting IME. The PC is risking some serious harm to get in and waste this boss.
4. Limited Effect: If the boss has enough advantages, the PC might deal limited effect. Take this into account when you pick how many slices your clocks have, too.
5. Resisting the boss: If you can swing this in the fiction, have the boss threaten multiple consequences. Maybe there’s incoming harm and the boss is moving to an advantageous position or threatens someone else (look in the rules for the example of the fleeing NPC). The PC can only resist one of those, so even if their dice are hot you can make the conflict have some hard choices.
Finally, if the players shoot your boss in the face first action and roll nothing but sixes all session, let that boss die gracefully. There’s always more NPCs.
“The PC can only resist one of those”. Is this a rule from the book?
I cannot find it, and I think that being able to resist anything that the GM throws at the PC is an important part of the game (even if the consequence is only reduced and not totally eliminated).
Page 11, v7.1:
The GM may also threaten several consequences at once, then the player may eliminate one with a resistance roll.
“She stabs you and then leaps off the balcony. Level 2 harm and you lose the opportunity to catch her with fighting.”
“I’ll resist that by grappling her as she attacks. She can stab me, but she doesn’t get away.”
Adam Schwaninger The Hound has already taken out the leader of the Fog Hounds by a critical shot from a controlled position, so those kinds of rolls I’m already comfortable with the NPC dying. š
Same page “If you suffer more than one consequence at once, you may make separate resistance rolls against each one, if you wish.”
Thanks for the answers folks. I’ve struggled a bit with making it challenging enough so this helps!
Bryan LotzĀ and David BarrenaĀ I stand corrected. I suppose it also comes down to if you can make it work in the fiction as well. Some fiction might not lend itself to resisting both/all, while some other situations would. Plus there’s the choice of whether the player would want to risk the stress, but that’s true regardless of number of incoming consequences.
.