I believe I get "most" of the whole DP feature as I understand from pg 28-29 of the book.

1 DP per player turn.

The active person gets to decide first if they want to use one, the opposing plyer (or GM) gets to decide next if they use one.

If using opposing dice, they all get added to the pool and roll...

My confusion is, action sequence. Normally the actions we've used them for have never had this type of setup so its never been a question... until now.

Player A has first Init.
BBEG has second Init.

Player A wants to use a DP to take a second action (i.e. make a second attack).
BBEG would like to use DP to prevent player A's second attack. There are a list of things BBEG can do, but unless their specific action is important to WHEN they can take it, I'm just trying to understand how the sequence works.

Does Player A get their normal attack, AND their second DP attack before the BBEG's DP triggers?

Honestly i never heard of the option for second actions via DP, do you have a source for that way to spend DP or how did this even come up?

2 hours ago, Grungyape said:

Player A has first Init.
BBEG has second Init.

Player A wants to use a DP to take a second action (i.e. make a second attack).
BBEG would like to use DP to prevent player A's second attack. There are a list of things BBEG can do, but unless their specific action is important to WHEN they can take it, I'm just trying to understand how the sequence works.

Does Player A get their normal attack, AND their second DP attack before the BBEG's DP triggers?

First, the second attack is a house-rule I assume.

Second, if this is allowed, the BBEG spending a DP won't prevent the player's second attack (unless that's another house-rule), but as DPs are usually spent to upgrade dice rolls, activate talents, or signature abilities, and other narrative funnies, the BBEG spending a DP would (normally) affect the difficulty of the (second) attack.

Think of it like this, a round is made up of several turns, the number of turns equals the number of initiative slots. So, if player A on his/her turn wants to spend a DP (for whatever purpose allowed around the table), another player/GM/NPC can spend a DP if they are the target or have an ability that allows them to act out of turn.

So, player A wants to increase the likelihood of scoring a critical injury, thus spending a DP to upgrade their attack dice pool, which let's say is normally PAA (1 proficiency 2 ability dice), spending the DP now changes the pool to PPA. The GM can then spend a DP (if they have one available before the player flips his or hers ) to upgrade the difficulty, in effect exchanging a difficulty die with a challenge die (or if the difficulty was already all challenge dice, the GM may add a difficulty die to the pool.)

When it comes to the more narrative and cinematic uses of DPs, the sequence matters less - in my opinion at least - as we are then in a different mode or level of the playing. But sure, if a player wants to spend a DP to introduce a fact of some kind that helps the players, the GM may respond in kind - not by negating the player introduced element, because the GM can always disallow a particular DP spend of this kind, but the GM may introduce a new detrimental effect (reinforcements, gas, lava, lasers, earth quake, whatevz).

So, the DPs cannot be spent to negate the effect of another DP, but can be used to create a narrative or cinematic response. At least that is my understanding of the rules.

38 minutes ago, Jegergryte said:

So, the DPs cannot be spent to negate the effect of another DP, but can be used to create a narrative or cinematic response. At least that is my understanding of the rules.

Yes, like Triumphs and Despairs, they can not be used to cancel each other.

1 hour ago, Grungyape said:

Player A wants to use a DP to take a second action (i.e. make a second attack).

It should be noted that, by RAW, spending a DP has about the same mechanical effect as spending a Triumph. You can upgrade your dice pool in the same way, or cause narrative things to happen with about the same value. If you start allowing things like second attacks, it makes them way more valuable, and the whole game, which already favours the attacker, turns far more lethal. Any player who understand the mechanics would only ever use it for a second attack, because dice upgrades are piddly things by comparison.

52 minutes ago, whafrog said:

Yes, like Triumphs and Despairs, they can not be used to cancel each other.

It should be noted that, by RAW, spending a DP has about the same mechanical effect as spending a Triumph. You can upgrade your dice pool in the same way, or cause narrative things to happen with about the same value. If you start allowing things like second attacks, it makes them way more valuable, and the whole game, which already favours the attacker, turns far more lethal. Any player who understand the mechanics would only ever use it for a second attack, because dice upgrades are piddly things by comparison.

OK, is there a reference to this in any book, the "spending a DP has about the same mechanical effect as spending a Triumph" statement?

16 minutes ago, Grungyape said:

OK, is there a reference to this in any book, the "spending a DP has about the same mechanical effect as spending a Triumph" statement?

No, but you can tell by comparing the examples in combat for spending a Triumph with the suggested uses of a DP. Both can be used to upgrade a dice pool, and that seems to be the pinnacle of mechanical effect (not something you can do with any number of advantages, even though personally I find it a bit underwhelming), so they are roughly on par.

That's just RAW though, if you want it to have more effect go for it.

I don't place DPs on par with Triumphs, and grant them a bit more flexibility in what can happen.

However, allowing a second action is not RAW and I would not allow it.

Here's how Destiny Points work:

Each action, each side may spend 1 Destiny Point.
This means that the player could spend a DP to upgrade the Ability or activate a talent, and a GM could then spend a DP to upgrade the Difficulty. Other uses are not limited in the same way.

OK, so this makes sense then.

As I was told, DP are used to make large than life actions possible for players. So, I think that's where we believed they could be used to take a second action. I can live with that however.

I do try to stress to my players that they can be used to create dramatic situations that don't horridly break the adventure, such as when our Jedi took 2 strain to concentrate and force pull a support pillar down, collapsing the ceiling and blocking off the approaching stormtroopers.

5 minutes ago, Grungyape said:

I do try to stress to my players that they can be used to create dramatic situations that don't horridly break the adventure, such as when our Jedi took 2 strain to concentrate and force pull a support pillar down, collapsing the ceiling and blocking off the approaching stormtroopers.

I'd require use of Move for that, but a Destiny Point to posit that there is such a pillar and that it would cause such an obstruction would certainly be appropriate.

Our group keeps the DP pool shifting constantly. So keeping it roughly the same weight as a triumph feels about right for us. Using DP for something truly epic over balance things if you constantly are able to do it. Plus it might make things stale. But that's pure speculation on my part. Our group has never really had a problem with RAW.