Variant Resistance.
Here is an alternative idea for Resistance rolls. Instead of subracting the result from 6, these work pretty much like any other action roll:
• 1-3=reduce consequences by one level per 2 stress taken
• 4-5=reduce consequences by one level per stress taken
• 6=reduce consequences by one level or avoid them with 1 Stress
• Critical=avoid consequences or reduce them by one level and recover 1 stress
The main difference from the standard method is that this one lets players decide how much stress they wish to spend on reduction or avoidance, according to the roll outcome. I don’t see it as any better or worse, just as a playstyle preference.
Feedback is welcome.
Lack of uncertainty would make for a much safer game.
I’m playing in a game where the GM lets us roll resistance and then choose if we want to take the stress, which I feel is similar to this. You feel a lot more control this way. That said if that’s your bag, this doesn’t seem too bad. It makes me think of taking Fate consequences.
I wonder if you won’t see many Traumas happen past the first one that you want to have for XP purposes.
As a comparison, my campaign plays serious hardball. Following the optimal rule in the back of the book, we start from a base of 7, so Resistance is never free, and you have to commit before you roll. It doesn’t discourage players from resisting, which you might expect, but I definitely see a big difference in the level of consideration that goes into gear and stress expenditure. Stress runs high, which IMO is a good barometer for tension.