Strike & Block or Block & Strike?

[foxandwarlock]

We had a situation where one of our players had his first volley scripted as: Strike, Block. The goblin that he was fighting scripted his first volley as: Strike.

So my question is this...does this mean that the character didn't Block because he scripted Strike first? Or do all things in a single volley happen in a narrative mish-mash at once? Did he have to script Block, Strike in order to fend off the goblin's attack?

I guess the underlying question is how strict is the sequence of events within a volley?

[luke]

I guess the underlying question is how strict is the sequence of events within a volley?

In the interest of fairness and ease of use, I designed the action sequence to be strict -- as written.

So if you have Strike and Block vs Strike and nuffin. Both characters hit simultaneously and the defensive move is mistimed. It happens.

-L

[Kublai]

The events should be very strict. 1st actions are resolved 1st, then 2nd actions, then 3rd actions. So, in your example, they both Strike each other at the same time, no blocking occurs. Then the Goblin hesitates as your PC resolves his second action, which was the Block. Of course, the Block is useless, but it makes sense to the narrative. The PC just got smacked and raises his guard against the next one.

[foxandwarlock]

Got it. Thanks.

*Curses as he loses narratavist debate with GM*

[Kevin]

If you have two actions in a volley, you should probably Block on the first with the knowledge that your opponent will get in at least one action. If you know you have higher Reflexes, you can take advantage of it by scripting a lot of your attacks as the second volley, when there's a good chance your opponent won't be able to respond.

[Blackberry]

Got it. Thanks.

*Curses as he loses narratavist debate with GM*

The combat system is a bit Gamist, the Artha/BIT system is a bit Narrativist, the Lifepath system is a bit Simulationist. It's all good.