My first topic is regarding Challenge Dice, there appears to be no hard and fast rules (I am familiar with page 42 of the rulebook) stating when it is appropriate to add them except for two circumstances: 1) add one for a melee or ranged attack, 2) add more based on specific action card requirements and/or options. So under what circumstance would I add them beside the above situations. Are they not added unless stated within the specified action or is it simply GM prerogative? What about a standard Skill check? Should I add at least one for any test that I call for a roll to determine the outcome? As per page 42 a simple task seems to indicate no roll is neccessary - "the propossed action simply succeeds". So does every roll I call for a player make require at least one Challenge Die?

Secondly, does stance always begin neutral when an encounter starts? Does stance only effect dice pools within encounter mode or does stance also effect story mode skill checks too. If stance can begin as something other than nuetral in encounter mode then does it effect Initiative. Does stance effect Skill checks other than attacks that are made during encounter mode?

Thirdly, I do not recall reading any rules regarding off-hand attacks. Should I simply add a Misfortune die or two, perhaps even a Challenge Die?

Lastly when a charatcer uses a maneuver to pull a weapon can he draw two at the same time as a single maneuver, say if he regularly wields a dagger and sword or sword and pistol?

Okay so that wasn't my last topic but this one runs with the previous two. The Execution Shot Action Card gives the player the option of making his ranged attack more difficult in order to get a follow up melee attack. Since it does not state a maneuver must be used to draw the melee weapon is that benefit part of the card's special ability or must you use a maneuver or must you already have the melee weapon drawn along with the pistol (this ties in with making an off-hand attack since if this is the case either the first or second attack must be off-handed and if it must already be drawn can both weapons be drawn at the same time as one maneuver)?

If I merely missed something please just direct me to the appropriate page(s). If not then thanks in advance for any advice/help anyone can offer.

Challenge dice:
Opposed checks/actions also state how many challenge dice to use. (Atk <= 2*Def is 4, Atk < Def is 3, Atk == Def is 2, Atk > Def is 1, Atk >= 2*Def is 0)
Some unopposed checks are indeed GM perogative based on how challenging the task is (the book lists some ideas for the ratings)
No, there are some situations where it is appropriate to have a player roll, even if the task is Simple (0 challenge dice). First, situations where there is a time limit or other constriction. Second, times where it is important to know how well the player succeeds (and if any other effects come into play). Thirdly, if circumstances concerning the task affect the completion.
For example, it might be a simple task for Joseph the Forger to forge a few characters on a letter. However, he is outdoors, trying to do it by the light of a campfire +[M], with a strong wind +[M], under the scrutiny of a brutish thug that is anxious to beat him up if he so much as breathes wrong +[M]. The task itself is simple, but the conditions modifying the task skew the likelihood of the task being completed successfully. So, the GM has Joseph's player roll for the task, assigning no challenge dice, but 3x [M] dice.

Secondly, does stance always begin neutral when an encounter starts?

It doesn't really say, but as far as I can tell, yes it starts in neutral. I could be wrong, though, and it does seem a bit wonky.

Does stance only effect dice pools within encounter mode or does stance also effect story mode skill checks too.

It affects all actions rolled for, including story mode, as far as I can tell.

If stance can begin as something other than nuetral in encounter mode then does it effect Initiative.

See answer above (it seems like it starts in neutral). If I am wrong then I would say it would have to affect initiative, potentially causing fatigue or delay to start the encounter.

Does stance effect Skill checks other than attacks that are made during encounter mode?

It affects all actions rolled for.

Thirdly, I do not recall reading any rules regarding off-hand attacks. Should I simply add a Misfortune die or two, perhaps even a Challenge Die?

For striking with an off-hand weapon, I would probably award a single [M]. A GM is just as good with not awarding a penalty at all. I definitely wouldn't award a <C>.

The Execution Shot Action Card gives the player the option of making his ranged attack more difficult in order to get a follow up melee attack. Since it does not state a maneuver must be used to draw the melee weapon is that benefit part of the card's special ability or must you use a maneuver or must you already have the melee weapon drawn along with the pistol (this ties in with making an off-hand attack since if this is the case either the first or second attack must be off-handed and if it must already be drawn can both weapons be drawn at the same time as one maneuver)?

My impression is that the action basically gives a 'free' maneuver to put away/the ranged weapon and draw a melee weapon to replace it and then make an attack with that melee weapon.

That execution shot card sounds fantastic. Thanks for all this info, it's all very informative. I'm curious at the same time, how is defense determined? I'm assuming it's a characteristic, like strength or Agility or something?

Regarding the Ranged Attack Execution Shot. The Special condition at the top of the card reads:

• Special: You may add <P> to your dice pool. If you do so, you may perform the Melee Strike Basic action immediately after resolving this action.

So only the action card of that name (the Basic action, Melee Strike) can be used as a follow-up. Further, to perform any action, you must be able to fulfill its requirements at the time you wish to use it. A requirement for Melee Strike is a melee weapon equipped. If you don't already have a melee weapon in hand, you won't be able to benefit from this free follow-up attack.

Granted, GMs are well within their purview to allow a character to go ahead and draw a melee weapon as a manoeuvre if doing so adds to the story or makes for an exciting, more memorable encounter.

The wording isn't clear, but I'm pretty sure that attacks are not opposed checks. Sure the card says something like "WS vs. Def" but Defence is not a characteristic or a skill.

Unless wearing armour or through some innate benefit, Defence is going to be 0. So, I don't think it would be right to compare WS versus Def as an opposed check. The rules do state that "the default difficulty for Melee Attack and Ranged Attack actions is easy (1d)" (p.58), which makes it pretty clear to me that they are unopposed checks.

I think the confusion comes from two places:

1) The way FFG chose to denote the Action Check line (like "Weapon Skill (ST) vs. Target Defence") follows the format for opposed checks, and

2) Section 4 on p.58 applies to all actions, not just attacks. The third and fourth paragraphs refer to opposed and unopposed checks in general across the board, not specifically as attacks.

So, since Def is not a characteristic, any action card that states "(skill/characteristic) vs. Def" is by an unopposed check. If that action card is a melee attack or ranged attack, the default difficulty is Easy (1d).* So, those attacks are not actually opposed by the opponent's weapon skill... the opponent's skill is only factored in if they use an active defence such as block, parry, dodge, or guarded position.

*I'm kind of suprised the default difficulty for attacks isn't average (2d), but maybe that's because of the active defenses mentioned above. I suppose that if an opponent weren't actively defending, it would be Easy to hit him. Which is cool... a player can actively defend and be harder to hit until they are overwhelmed by attacks (represented by all active defences recharging.)

dvang said:

There is no off-hand attack penalty. Any character can have a one-handed weapon in each hand, but can only attack with one at a time (player choice) unless the action card provides a specific exception, such as Double Strike or Execution Shot.

Excellent ynnen! Not having the card in front of me, I winged it from what was posted. It makes perfect sense now that you pointed it out.

There is no off-hand attack penalty. Any character can have a one-handed weapon in each hand, but can only attack with one at a time (player choice) unless the action card provides a specific exception, such as Double Strike or Execution Shot.

And a GM is well within their rights to apply conditional modifiers, such as a single [M], to any roll. While the rules don't say that an off-hand attack *must* have a penalty, I could certainly see a GM applying a [M] to a player using an off-hand weapon to attack if they aren't used to doing so. Just like adding [M] because the PC winded from a long swim/climb, or [M] because it is raining, etc.

dvang said:

Absolutely! I just meant that there is nothing dictating an off-hand attack penalty.

If I get this right for opposed actions, having a high Characteristic/Skill not only makes the task easier to achieve (making having higher action(dice or whatever the rating is based on) than the opponent, more likely, thus making the task easier) , it also gives more dice making it easier to gain a success, compounding togeather to make an opposed action alot easier.

Basically making it the higher the characteristic you have the more dice to gain a success, while more likely decreasing the difficuilty of the action as well.

Is this the case or am I missing something?

On Stance:
Given action cards have a conservative and reckless side you use when you are in the corosponding stance, which side of a card do you use to determine action resolution if you are in the Neutral stance?

Loswaith said:

Yeah, you're right. With opposed rolls you often benefit from having higher attributes *and* easier difficulty.

If you are in the neutral stance you will use the side you are more inclined to, eg if you're CCC-R you will use the Conservative side. If you're CC-RR, then you get to choose.

Okay so I think the only thing I'm still looking for an answer to is does stance reamin a constant effect from story mode to encounter mode and back again or is it only pertinent to encounter mode where it always starts at neutral? If the ladder is true than it never affects story mode skill checks nor would it affect initiative unless something allowed it to change right before initiative is rolled. If the former is true than stance could fluctuate at the players whim all throughout story mode and thereby affecting all skill checks made within and since it could be anywhere on the stance meter when combat (encounter mode) begins it could affect initiative as well.

I'm pretty sure that stance only applies to encounter mode, and the default starting point is neutral. This is supported by having to move one step closer to neutral during the Rally step.

The usual caveats apply... for example, if you can justify to the GM that your character is fuming mad when he confronts the Noble at the beginning of the social encounter, I could see supporting starting off one or two spaces deep on the reckless side.

Reaper Steve said:

Because the first thing a character does of a turn is adjust his stance, then they can have an effective default of 1C, N or 1R, generally. So, for story mode we play that you can have one of those stances automatically. Any more extreme stance has to be justified by the situation. But, in effect, what we get is each character often has an implicit default that they will use.

So, eg, our bright wizard does everything at 1R, even if he's buying a vest, that's just the way he is, and if he wanted to go Neutral he would bother to mention why. If he wanted to do something at 3R in story mode, unless it was obvious, I'd want him to justify why. But, usually, just picking up the dice is enough of a signal of the mood he's in. If he wanted to do something in, say, 1C, then he'd need much more justification, and I probably wouldn't let him anyway. Of course, most characters are a bit more subtle than our bright wizard.

So, I would say let a player use any stance they want in story mode as long as it is backed up by the situation and their character.

I agree with monkey. Also, figure in roleplaying. If the Bright Wizard has been yelling at an inkeeper and staff, rushing headlong into accusations, cutting off the inkeeper's protestations, and then wants to make an Intimidate roll ... the player could reasonably request being in an R2 or R3 stance for the roll. If the Wizard, however, patiently listened to the inkeeper's answers, took his time to consider his replies, etc, then a Reckless stance is not warranted for the roll.

monkeylite said:

Is this clarifed in the rules or just a (sensible sounding) house rule?

It's in the rules. Pg 51, the black Stance & Action cards box above.

"If the activation token is on the central neutral space, the player uses whichever side his character has more stance pieces for - his character's dominant stance. If the character relies on both stances evenly, the player uses the dominant stance chosen during character creation."