The Judge will remind the PCs that served with, or rode with, the No Buffalo Outfit . . . that they were in fact in Kansas, at least once.

OOC:

It seems to me that the players (with the Judge's input) ought to discuss the background and present setting (where the PCs find themselves to begin this chapter of our adventure) and come to some sort of consensus before we jump in and begin writing. By way of example, I have absolutely no interest in a "Weird West" setting (involving werewolves, zombies, vampires and the like), but I understand that that sort of thing may appeal to others.

So, I'm going to ante up with a proposal, with the understanding that it is for the purposes of starting a discussion. In my version of our setting, the South did indeed win its independence as a result of the War Between the States/Civil War, and the PCs now find themselves in a cantina in Havana, Cuba. I perceive Jake as being there on behalf of certain Southern interests, but obviously this leaves the other PCs with a blank canvas as to what they are doing there.

This idea not a crazy as it (perhaps) sounds. Historically the South did have designs on expanding its influence into Cuba, but this setting assumes that this has not yet occurred -- Cuba is still under Spanish control. However, with an independent South close by, ideas that had originated before the war are being dusted off and re-examined.

This would place the PCs in an entirely different setting, but one which is, I feel, historically justifiable. It would also give the Judge a chance to exercise his historical chops by expanding into a setting that (I suspect) he does not know quite as well as the American West.

Again, this is being tossed out for discussion. I understand that it may not appeal to other players or the Judge, in which case my feelings won't be hurt. :)

Edit: Moved to this thread from the OOC thread.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:54, Tue 14 Aug 2018.

OOC:

Here is another variation on a (somewhat) similar theme. Let us assume that Mexico, still seething from the effects of the Texas revolution and the indignities heaped upon it by the young United States during the war between the two nations, took advantage of the Gringos being locked in a war with each other by annexing the area that is now New Mexico, and areas of southern California.

Perhaps the PCs now find themselves in a cantina in old Santé Fe, which has now passed back under Mexican control . . .
This message was last edited by the player at 16:02, Fri 17 Aug 2018.

OOC: Since it's just Jake and the Judge (tv show title?) we're gonna have some fun with a sample combat based on Jake's initial design.

---------------------------------

Jacob Richardsen couldn't sleep. Normally, the Texan could sleep anywhere. Tonight, on the chaparral, with his pards all snoring loud as thunder, the rifleman just couldn't rest his mind.

Finally, near dawn, Richardsen arose and set to walkin'. He kept the Winchester in the crook of his left arm, as usual. At a glance, a feller might think the rifleman had three arms. Technically, or at least figuratively, he did.

The rifleman was a mite deaf in his left ear but fortunately the sound from the rolling rock was to his right. Turning towards the sound, the Texan saw a silhouette on the ridge above, and the glint of a gun barrel in the early rays of the sunrise.

---------------------------------

OOC: Initiative. Read the Savaged Goin' sticky forum.

The Judge draws from the Initiative deck. Jacob, then the silhouette (OOC: crazy draw)
Jacob: Joker
Sil: Ten

JR has the initiative. In fact, because Jacob drew the Joker, he may act at any time during the combat. In a "solo" combat, it is less impactful than it might be in a larger fight. Nonetheless, Jacob may act, or wait for the silhouette to act. Richardsen may even interrupt another character's action with the Joker. If Jacob possessed any Joker Edges, waal, look out.

---------------------------------

OOC: Jake agreed to play a public test combat. Here it is. Jake, feel free to ask any questions, here, so that everyone can benefit from your trailblazing.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 4):

OOC:

Since this is a sample "Combat", should JR assume that the silhouette is hostile? If not, he would probably hail the stranger.

Thanks

Jacob spotted the silhouette up on the ridge to his right and could tell that it was a man with a longarm up there -- but that was about all. Squinting up at the fellow, Jacob flexed his knees, ready to act quickly if the man made a hostile move. He figured that a friendly fellow would hail the camp -- a bad man who had ill intentions would likely just up and shoot at him.

Jacob knew that he had mighty quick reflexes -- they had saved his bacon more than once -- and he trusted that he would still be able to react before the stranger got a shot off, if it appeared that the man was gunnin' for him . . .

---

OOC:

I decided to have Jacob go ahead and react, based upon the information that the Judge provided. Since the Judge has specified that Jacob can interrupt the stranger's actions, Jacob will see what the other man does next, and will interrupt upon seeing a hostile move (e.g., raising the rifle into a firing position).

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 6):

Trampus Monday had always said Jacob was too good-mannered. Why that thought had passed through the rifleman's mind, as he saw the silhouette take cover and level the long arm, the Texan didn't ponder. Recognizing the the silhouette's hostile intent, Richardsen makes his move to interrupt the interloper.

-----------------------------

OOC: As the rifleman drew the Joker, he sees the hostile action and is able to interrupt, as stated. The Judge already rolled for the attack action for the silhouette (aka AFJ), but withholding adjudication until Jacob's action -- which will come before the result of AFJ's shot. The Judge assumes that Jake's Interruption is to shoot.

Because the Judge knows SW combat is new to the player:
Again, assuming Jacob is shooting, he rolls a die for his Shooting skill (d10), and a d6 for the Wild Die. Highest roll prevails. If you roll the max on either die, that is called an "ace" and you roll it again and add the result. (Yes, aces can ace again . . . ). If you roll snake eyes, bad.

The to-hit number for ranged combat is 4. It is dim light, so it's -1 to the roll. And AFJ has light cover, another -1. It is short range for a Winchester (no mod). That means Jacob would roll d10-2, d6-2, needing a 4 to hit.  (The Judge didn't apply the -1 to AFJ's first roll, but will factor it in, as well as Jacob's Dodge modifier, when adjudicating AFJ's roll). When using the die roller, it is helpful to "record each die" and to use the "manual" field, in this case entering "d10-2,d6-2" and the roller will roll both the d10 and d6, in that order and apply the minus 2 to each roll.

We will pause on damage if Jacob hits, to examine whether the attack hits -- and if it gets any raises.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 7):

From the actions of the man up on the hill, it seemed pretty clear that he had a hostile intent. Rather than standing in one spot like a statue and hoping for the best, Jacob took off for the nearest cover at a lope before his opponent could get off a shot.

After he had moved a bit he leveled his Winchester at the would-be bushwhacker and fired a shot, then dropped prone so as to give the varmint a tougher target.

---

OOC:

12:06, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 5,5 using d10,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 5,5.  Ranged Attack (Trademark Weapon).

I have assumed that Jake is using his trademark weapon, and that the bonuses provided by the "Improved Trademark Weapon" Edge (+2) will cancel out the negatives to his Attack roll that the Judge mentioned above. That's a good thing, because otherwise he would have missed by 1.

I don't know how close Jake is to the nearest cover, but he will move towards it and try to reach it before dropping prone (a free action, I believe) at the end of his turn.

PS. 08:30, Today: Judge Messalen rolled 4,5 using d8,d6 with rolls of 4,5.  AFJ Winchester r1. Based on this roll (d8, d6), it looks to me like Jake is facing a Wild Card, who is a pretty fair shot himself.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:23, Tue 21 Aug 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 8):

Richardsen lopes towards a thicket of scrub, finding some quick cover and then squeezing off a round from the rifle. He doesn't stare after his bullet to see its result. Instead, the Texan drops to his belly attempting to take full advantage of the waist-high vegetation.

--------------------

OOC: Jake is correct about the attack roll. It was -2 for cover and dim light; +2 for his Improved Trademark Weapon. The result of 5 hits the ranged attack target number (TN) of 4. A hit but no raise; a raise requires a result that is 4 better than the TN.

Jake please roll damage, normal 2d8; damage dice can ace. There is no Wild Die for damage.

And yes, AFJ is no slouch.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 9):

OOC:

Here is Jake's Damage roll: 12:17, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 10 using 2d8+2, rerolling max with rolls of 4,4.  Damage (Winchester, Joker).

I added a +2 to the roll not because of the Improved Trademark Weapon Edge (which I believe only applies to Attack rolls), but because Jake drew a Joker. I recall reading somewhere that it adds +2 to both Trait tests and Damage rolls (during the applicable Round of combat).

I didn't backtrack and add it to Jake's Attack roll, because it would have given him a 7 -- it wasn't needed to hit his target (the 5 took care of that), and it wasn't quite enough to give him a Raise on the Attack roll, so I didn't see any need to do so (other than being precise, I suppose).

Hopefully the 10 on the Damage roll will be enough to grant a Raise on the Damage. I don't remember what that does, but I believe that gaining a Raise is better than not (as long as you are the shoot*er* and not the shoot*ee*).

PS. I'm trying to remember a RL bad man from the old West who had the initials "AFJ". Nobody immediately comes to mind, but admittedly your knowledge of that time and place is superior to mine. :)
This message was last edited by the player at 17:11, Wed 22 Aug 2018.

OOC: Replies to the game mechanics -- narrative will follow after the Judge makes a roll or two.


That is a Setting Rule called Joker's Wild. The Judge wasn't planning to use that rule (see the sticky forum for the Setting Rules). I could be convinced to use it, if players like it (and acknowledge that as most rules, it would work in both directions -- i.e., if an enemy drew the Joker, they would also get the +2 bonuses). For now, we'll skip it. For the record, Jake's assessment of the +2 (if it were applied) to the attack roll was exactly correct . . . it wouldn't have changed anything in this case.


So, no +2 for Joker's Wild means the damage result is an 8. Damage is compared to the opponent's Toughness. AFJ has Toughness = 6. So 8 against 6 means a success, but no raise (as Jake said, raises occur when the TN -- in this case TN 6 -- is exceeded by 4 on the damage result). Again, the result of the damage is a success but no raise, which means that AFJ is Shaken but doesn't suffer a Wound.

AFJ, since his action is about to happen, will make a Vigor test to "unshake." If that fails, he may use a Benny to unshake. If he doesn't unshake, he won't be able to do anything other than a free action.  (The Judge mentions this as it is important to the combat process -- the Judge also addressed this in a sticky message, and intends to add more such notes as we progress with using SW in this game, assuming anyone else joins Jacob).

One way or another, AFJ will unshake (question of how and whether Benny is used) and the Judge will post narrative later today to continue.


Hehehehehe. A hint . . . pard, AFJ is an historical character featured in a DHR free product.
This message was last edited by the GM at 17:55, Wed 22 Aug 2018.

Jacob, lying prone on the ground, hears the partially-muffled sound of a gunshot (to his left) and bullet finding purchase among the bushes in the thicket.

The Texan has the initiative for the new round, although he cannot currently see his opponent from this prone position.

----------------------------

OOC: AFJ made the Vigor test to unshake. Therefore, he was able to fire his weapon at Jacob in r1. He missed, spent a benny and re-rolled the trait test (-3 all told -- -1 for dim light, -1 for Jacob's Dodge, -1 for Jacob's cover) and still missed.

The Judge re-shuffled the initiative deck (it is re-shuffled at the end of a round in which the Joker is dealt).

Jake: King
AFJ: Five, Ten (ten is better, but Jacob still has the initiative) - AFJ has Level-Headed and gets to draw an extra initiative card (forgot to do that the first time but it didn't matter after Jacob's Joker -- and the next card wasn't the second Joker).

Jacob's choice to go prone would give a +2 to cover, now (the Judge ruled the first round was only 1 because of the circumstances). It starts at 2 now, but an additional result is that Jacob cannot see his opponent from this position. He could certainly get off his belly and shoot at the previous position -- but he doesn't know whether AFJ is still there. He could make a Notice test to locate the enemy -- but that would be an action. In SW, a PC may take more than one action in a round (as many as desired), but each extra action beyond the default of 1 action means a -2 to each Trait test involved in the actions taken that round. So, Jacob could do both Notice and Shooting this round (for example), but each of those tests would be -2 when done in the same round.

BTW, the Judge isn't trying to convince the player to take any given action(s), just using the situation to elaborate or rules, choices and how the SW handles such things in combat. Jacob could decide to stay prone, our move a little and do Notice test only, move again, whatever.

OOC: A couple of rules questions:

If Jake rises up from prone (into a crouched position, presumably, in order to gain the benefit of cover from the thicket of shrubbery*), is that considered a move action? The reason I ask is that Jake gains the benefit of the Marksman Edge if he does not move during a round.

Does a "crouch" afford a (lesser) defensive bonus, in the same sense that being prone does -- say, a -1 as opposed to a -2?

If Jake wishes to take a Notice test in an attempt to locate AFJ, does he have to rise up from his prone position to do so?

Thanks, as always.

PS. *I can hear the Knights who say "Ni!" muttering "A shrubbery! He should bring us a shrubbery!!"

PPS. I have noticed (no flies on me, Pard) that +1/-1 and +2/-2 modifiers carry a lot more "weight" when rolling lower-denomination dice, as opposed to a d20. For example, your chances are pretty slim if you are rolling a d4 and you are facing a -1 modifier, let alone a -2 (you would have to Ace your roll in order to succeed, I suppose). It makes perfect sense, but it didn't occur to me until I started making the rolls (and crossing my fingers when AFJ made his).
This message was last edited by the player at 20:20, Wed 22 Aug 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 13):

OOC: Good questions. The Judge sees a distinction between the rules, and the circumstances under which rules might apply. The Judge might make different rulings in different situations. As far a the rules go:

Getting up from Prone is a move action (2" worth). Whether all the way to one's feet, or just to a crouch or knee.

Crouch is -1, Prone -2 (p65)

Notice checks can be made while prone.

(In this circumstance, the Judge has already ruled that Jacob cannot see the opponent because of his position. Therefore, moving to a crouch, or crawling while prone or something similar is needed in order to look for his opponent up the ridge. Or, Jacob could do a Notice, looking around at the area that he can see from his current position. Maybe, the varmint has already moved . . . )

P.S.
"A nice one, not too expensive."

True . . . however, an ace or a snake eyes can change things quick, even with a strong -2 or +2 modifier in place. You haven't rolled an ace yet, so you haven't felt the adrenaline surge. Again, aces work both ways, as do snake eyes for NPC Wild Cards.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the GM at 20:39, Wed 22 Aug 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 11):

OOC: Wait, the Judge was incorrect about the Joker and the +2. Jake was correct. The Joker's Wild adds to that rule ... each PC gets a benny when a PC draws the Joker.

So Jake's hit would have been a Shaken and Wound on AFJ. However, AFJ would have spent a benny to "Soak" the Wound, and the Vigor roll would have applied to the soak, ending in the same result (the roll succeeded, soaking the one Wound and removing the Shaken result at the same time). AFJ would have been able to attack and still would have missed. He probably wouldn't have used a benny to re-roll that first attack bu he might have. So the Judge will say he has used two bennies (one for soak and one for Shooting re-roll).

The situation now didn't change, just the events that led up to the now. It is still Jake's initiative in r2.
This message was last edited by the GM at 21:04, Wed 22 Aug 2018.

I envy you your memory -- 'tis much better than mine! :)

So . . . if I understand you correctly, if Jake fails his Notice Check, he will not know AFJ's location for sure until the following round (based upon the muzzle-flash of AFJ's rifle, I assume) -- but even if he fails he can rise up and fire at AFJ's previous location, hoping that the man has not moved (which means that he may or may not have wasted a cartridge).

Do I have that right?

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 17):

Yes, essentially, but if he does both Notice and Shooting in the same round it will be -2 for each trait test.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 18):

Thanks. I need to post in another game, so I may or may not work up an IC post for Jake tonight. Should be able to get to it by tomorrow evening, at the latest (tomorrow morning and afternoon are shaping up as pretty busy for me in RL).

This message was deleted by the player at 02:44, Thu 23 Aug 2018.

~Waal, hellfire!~ Jake thought to himself as he realized that he could no longer see the man who was shooting at him. The Texan had no way of knowing whether the would-be bushwhacker had stayed put after the Texan disappeared down into the underbrush, or had moved to a different position.

Jake slithered over some four yards to his right, moving away from where he thought he heard the slug from his foe's round hit. That way, if the man fired at the spot where he had seen Jake drop prone, the rifleman wouldn't be there anymore.

The Texan then concentrated on trying to spot his opponent's location up on the ridge, reasoning that he now had a different line-of-sight than he had had before. Plus, even if he didn't spot the man, if the fellow fired at him again, Jake would see the muzzle-flash for certain-sure.

---

OOC:

Move: Jake will stay prone and slide 2 inches (four yards of IC movement -- see p. 16) over to his right. Since he is prone, this is his full allotted movement.

Action: 22:47, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 4,1 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4,1.  Notice Check. Success!

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 21):

Jacob, or Jake as he was sometimes called, crawls a ways towards his right, hoping to spy the bushwhacker up yon ridge. The Texan figured it out pretty quick, as he saw the muzzle flash in the dim, pre-dawn light. Maybe the bastard had stayed exactly where he was when the Texan had moved, fired and gone prone. The rifleman, still on his belly, hears his opponent's weapon report; the bullet buries itself some three feet away along the path that Jacob had intended to slither, spewing grit and dust.

A miss, but durned close for comfort. Despite the adverse conditions, the bush whacker had come close. Richardsen couldn't help but feel a bit pinned down. Clearly, this prone position gave him good cover, but not much advantage other'n'that. Not against a marksman like himself. He wondered for a moment about his pards, but even if they had heard the reports, they were likely minutes away back at the camp.

OOC: The Judge counted these modifiers:

-1 dim, -1 JR's Dodge, -2 prone, 0 distance = -4
+2 Marksman, AFJ didn't move
net result -2  so the roll was d8-2,d6-2 . . . no ace and low rolls (not snake eyes) so a plain old miss

Obviously, Jake's Notice was successful; the Judge described that in the narrative -- Jake knows where the man is, right now. Before next round initiative.

The Judge drew the initiative cards for r3.

Jake: Two
AFJ: King, Five (King wins)

AFJ has the initiative.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 22):

The bush whacker wasn't giving Jake much of a chance, but he couldn't find his mark in the dim light. His third round, fired almost immediately after the second also buries itself in the ground, this time just a little behind the Texan. Apparently, Jacob's opponent had overcompensated. Still, no great comfort to the rifleman.

Richardsen sees the muzzle-flash and then sees the silhouette duck behind a rock outcropping.

OOC: The Judge isn't rolling well and the -2 net isn't helping. Jacob's action now, end of r3. He knows where the man is . . . AFJ still has cover even after moving, maybe better cover, but Jacob doesn't know how well it will protect the bush whacker.
This message was last edited by the GM at 21:38, Thu 23 Aug 2018.

OOC:

I want to double-check the modifiers for Jake's shot before I make his roll, so that I can set it up properly.

I am guessing a net +1 for Jake: (-1 Dim, -1 Cover, -1 Target crouching) vs. (+2 Improved Trademark Weapon Edge, +2 Marksman Edge).

If AFJ has totally disappeared behind his cover (at least initially), Jake will hold until he has a target to shoot at. With only two people being involved in the fight, that shouldn't matter as much as it otherwise might.

Thanks.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the player at 23:54, Thu 23 Aug 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 24):

OOC: The net is correct. -3 +4 = +1 (it is simply +2 for cover overall).

It seemed to Jake that the hombre up on the ridge must have a pretty good idea where the Texan was, because his shots weren't all that far off the mark. The good news was that Jake had the man spotted now, and he squeezed off a shot.

He was pretty sure that his bullet went where he had aimed it, but he couldn't tell how much it had hurt the bushwhacker.

---

OOC:

Move: None.

Attack: 00:08, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 3,3 using d10+1,d6+1, rerolling max with rolls of 2,2.  Winchester Shot, Round 3.

00:09, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 10,3 using d10+1,d6+1, rerolling max with rolls of 9,2.  Bennie Re-Roll, Round 3. A hit, with one Raise.

00:10, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 3 using 2d8, rerolling max with rolls of 1,2.  Damage, Round 3.

00:27, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 7 using 2d8, rerolling max with rolls of 3,4.  Bennie Damage Re-Roll (Blood & Guts).

Total Damage: 10 (A Raise, I think.)

Notes: Jake burned two Bennies this round, one on his Attack Roll and one on his Damage Roll (Blood & Guts Setting Rule). I'll be curious to see whether they were well-spent. :)

After I had rolled for Damage, I noticed that a Raise on one's Attack roll gives an extra d6 of Damage, so I added that roll after the fact.
This message was last edited by the player at 04:51, Fri 24 Aug 2018.

OOC:

I have a rules question for you. You wrote in pertinent part (Msg. #23):



How is it that AFJ can both move (my reading is that he crouched down to find better cover) and also use the Marksman Edge (I believe that I saw somewhere that AFJ is using that Edge -- which certainly made me sit up and take notice -- you are right that AFJ surely is no slouch!).

My understanding was that moving (even crouching) would prevent one from using the Marksman Edge that round.

Thanks.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 27):

OOC: That's a good catch, Jake, re: Marksman Edge. AFJ shouldn't have been able to move that round. Still getting used to the Initiative in SW and when AFJ got two actions in a row, I got mixed up. You are correct that AFJ would need to stay in place. So he stayed in place.

The modifiers for Jake are the same; however. I was going to give AFJ the same +2 Jake was getting for medium cover (prone is medium cover) whether he moved or not, based on the circumstances. The benny for the attack roll was well spent, as it was a hit.

The benny for damage re-roll is valuable, but it would only be a Shaken result. You don't add the two damage rolls together. You can use the benny to re-roll, looking for a better result, which you got with the 7. They way you did it, 7 would be the total.

Moreover, you didn't account for the extra damage die you get for getting a raise on the Shooting attack, in your original roll. As per p67, a raise on the attack (hit and raise) earns an extra 1d6 in damage (one time bonus, no matter how many raises on the hit). As with other damage rolls, this die can ace.

So, you should have rolled 2d8,1d6 for damage. You could still have re-rolled with the benny if the total roll was low (e.g., let's pretend Jake rolled a 1 on the d6 for a total of 4, he could re-roll the whole thing by spending the benny as per Blood & Guts). However, what if the original d6 had aced? Maybe spending a benny for re-roll wasn't needed.

Since this is just a test, let's just go with it. He decided to spend the benny and now he still gets to roll the remaining 1d6 as part of the re-roll, possibly getting enough for a raise.

OOC:

Here is Jake's re-roll of the extra d6 of Damage:

12:17, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 4 using 1d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4.  Benny Re-Roll (Raise Damage From Hit).

That ups his Damage total by one, I think -- to an 8. Not enough for a Raise on the Damage, I don't believe -- I think that AFJ's Toughness is good enough to prevent that.

I didn't realize that one went with the higher of the two Damage rolls -- I'm used to adding them from all my d20 games, and did it that way out of habit. I probably wouldn't have spent the Benny on the Damage re-roll if I had realized that, but let's go with it -- as you say, this is just practice.

The only reason that I  questioned AFJ's movement is that I had read up on the Marksman Edge (since Jake has it as well as AFJ, as you know) and was aware of the "no movement" rule.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 29):

OOC: No, still a slight misinterpretation here.

The damage roll for Jake was 2d8 + 1d6 (sorry I didn't make that clear). As per page 67, when you get a raise on an attack roll you get to add 1d6 to the total.

So, if we say Jake spent the 2nd benny to re-roll damage, his new result is 3+4+4 = 11. That is enough for a success and a raise on damage against Toughness 6, so once again Jake gets a good result -- Shaken and Wound against AFJ.

AFJ chooses NOT to spend a benny to soak the wound. He will get a chance at a Vigor roll on his next action to unshake. (This is a gamble, as Jake might get the initiative and fire again before AFJ gets the Vigor roll.)

That decision made: the Judge draws the next initiative round (still from unshuffled deck as the Joker hasn't turned up since the shuffle after r1).

Jake: Eight
AFJ: Ace, Four (Ace wins)

AFJ has the initiative. The Judge will post his next action soon, beginning with the attempt to unshake.

AFJ had been in tetchy situations more than a time or two. He respected the shooter below, who had managed to hit with his long arm despite the bushwhacker's superior position. Regardless, this was no time for mutual admiration meetings.

Shrugging off his opponent's bullet, AFJ calls out -- some sort of bird call. He then slides backwards, into the brush along the ridge.

Jacob Richardsen hears the call, but he loses sight of his previous target, the silhouette melting into the landscape.

OOC: AFJ achieved a success on the Vigor roll and is no longer shaken. He now has one wound. Normally, that would incur -1 to all Trait tests, but AFJ has "Nerves of Steel" and therefore ignores the penalties from the first wound. The Judge rolled for the Injury suffered from the wound.

Jake's action.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 31):

OOC:

Given that Jake has lost sight of AFJ once again, he will need to make a Notice Check if he wishes to try and spot the man, correct?

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 32):

OOC: Yes. If he can be spotted. Jake may need to move again before he could succeed at a Notice test.

OOC:

Okay, thanks. Yeah, Jake changed his position (and his LOS) last time, and was able to spot AFJ. Maybe it will work again, maybe not. :)

I'll post IC for Jake tonight if I have time -- if not, it'll be some time tomorrow.

Jake scowled as the man up on the ridge above him suddenly disappeared again. The bushwhacker had dropped hisself lower down, stepped back, or gone to the left or right, out of Jake's line of sight -- or maybe some combination of the three.

Moving a little had helped the Texan spot his foe the last time, so Jake tried it again, scootching over a little to his right. The rifleman had faintly heard what sounded like a bird call from the ridge up above him, and wondered if it was the man up there who was signaling someone -- or something . . . it didn't seem likely to the Texan that a real bird would be singin' out and bringin' attention to hisself in the middle of all the fuss and noise of a gunfight.

~Is he signalin' to his pards, maybe? Or to his horse? Has he got his horse trained to come to him when he signals, like Cole? Could be that he's had enough -- or maybe my shot hit him hard enough that he's ready to back off an' try his luck with somebody who's got a mite less sand than I turned out to have.~

With a shrug, the Texan got down to work trying to spot the man up above him. His new position afforded him an excellent line of sight, where the sun wasn't in his eyes, and he was able to take a good, long look . . .

---

OOC:

Move: Jake will scootch over 2" to his right, staying prone.

Action: 12:42, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 2,17 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,(6+6+5)17.  Notice Check.

Notes: Wow. If that had been a Damage roll, or Jake's Wild Die roll whilst the Texan was shooting . . . This "Acing" can pile points onto a roll in a hurry.

On another note, I couldn't remember whether it was Travis or Cole who had trained his horse to come to him when he gives a signal. I took a guess that it was Cole, but if'n it's Travis, I'll edit. :)

OOC: yeah, like I said, pard, we hadn't experienced an ace in this combat yet. Now you have a feel for it.

I'll post later today.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 35):

Jacob stays prone, inching a few yards further and straining to look up the slope in the dim pre-dawn light. Having afforded himself a clear view, he still cannot locate his opponent, at least not visually. The Texan felt sure that the bush whacker wasn't in his line of sight. With his good ear, Richardsen hears something from above -- it sounds like movement -- and it is not getting closer.

OOC: Jake's Notice roll was successful, but from his current position it isn't possible to see AFJ. Therefore, the Judge ruled that the Notice resulted in hearing something (in SW the Notice skill covers more than just "looking for" something and in this case, it made sense to rule in this fashion).

The Judge drew r5 initiative:

Jake: Nine (diamonds)
AFJ: Eight, Nine (clubs)

Both have Nine, reverse suit order breaks ties, so Jake has the initiative.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 37):

Jake found himself wondering if the bushwhacker was playing a cat-and-mouse game with him, trying to humbug the Texan into rising up out of his cover so that the man up-slope would have a clearer shot.

~Reckon I'll stay put for a mite,~ the rifleman thought. He aimed his rifle-barrel at the top of the cover up on the ridge, so that he would quickly be able to target his foe if the man suddenly appeared in the hopes of catching the Texan with his britches down, so to speak.

---

OOC:

Jake will Hold his actions this Round, and will seek to interrupt the bushwhacker's actions if the man suddenly reappears on the ridge above him.

Edit: Replaced "fool" with "humbug" in the first sentence of the post.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:38, Sat 25 Aug 2018.

AFJ continued his chosen course of action, cocking his head to listen for anyone following him. The bush whacker issues another bird call, into the night.

The Texan hears the bird call, same as before.

OOC: Interesting.

The Judge draws initiative for r6 (from an un-shuffled deck):

Jake: Five
AFJ: Joker, Ten

With the Joker, as we learned from Jake earlier, AFJ gets +2 and may act at any time. The initiative deck would be re-shuffled for next round.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 39):

Jacob Richardsen had remained prone for maybe half a minute, total. Now, he hears hoofbeats pounding away from him, up the slope where that bush whacker had tried to waylay the Texan.

It's fair to say, reckons the riifleman, that his opponent -- or one of the bush whacker's allies -- had ridden off. Whether any more were hereabouts, Jake couldn't tell. He just knew he had never heard more than one gun nor more than one sound of movement at a time, whether it be human or equine.

OOC: Jake's action in r6. AFJ used the Joker up front.
This message was last edited by the GM at 15:48, Sun 26 Aug 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 40):

~Reckon that's him ridin' off,~ Jake thought to himself as he heard the receding hoofbeats. The more the Texan thought about it, though, he could think of other possibilities.

If the bushwhacker was an especially crafty rascal, he could have hit his horse on the rump and sent it galloping off, then settled in behind a rock to await Jake to come trudging up-slope. Or, even if the bushwhacker hisself had left, he might have left a pard or two behind to finish the job -- Jake still hadn't figured out what the bird-calls meant.

But when it came right down to it, Jake couldn't resist heading up to the top of the ridge to see what he could see -- just like the bear who went over the mountain. He was downright curious, and just plain wanted to know what he'd find up yonder.

The Texan rose up to a crouching position and started moving forward through the underbrush . . .

OOC:

Move: Jake will rise up to a crouch and start heading towards the slope of the ridge, his rifle held at the ready.

Action: If a target presents itself, Jake will take a shot. But I consider that unlikely (this Round) and haven't rolled for the Attack.

Notes: BTW, I finally figured out who AFJ is -- it was the "A" that threw me off-track. I obviously forgot that the gentleman in question was known by his middle name. :)

PS. Since this is an ongoing encounter, am I correct in assuming that Jake's expended Bennies do not refresh?
This message was last edited by the player at 23:57, Sun 26 Aug 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 41):

OOC: Bennies refresh when: the Judge decides to award any. That could be one at a time -- good RP, spectacular combat action, gut buster, etc. -- or it could be all at once. SW bennies are refreshed in each "game session." It will be up to the Judge as to when that happens during the course of play in this forum.

You start with 3 bennies, plus or minus any as per Edges/Hindrances. For Jake right now, it is clearly still the same game session. But whenever we play a full session again (solo or with other characters), Bennies would be refreshed (and they are NOT accumulated over sessions. Use 'em or lose 'em.

AFJ ... 'bout time you reasoned that out, pard.

---------------------

Richardsen, waddling up a slope in dim pre-dawn light of the chaparral, thinks various thoughts. In another few seconds, he will be near the edge of the ridge -- the place where the bush whacker had begun the skirmish.

---------------------

OOC: Jacob should make a Notice test.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 42):

OOC:

22:14, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 11, 5 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of (6+5)11,5.  Notice Check.

Jake is strikin' it rich on these Notice rolls. Would love to save some of these Aces for Shooting or Damage rolls . . .

PS. Judge, when it comes to initiative, are you physically drawing cards at your desk, or does the RPoL Dice-Roller have a card-related option? I'm just, you know . . . curious. :)
This message was last edited by the player at 02:27, Mon 27 Aug 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 43):

The Texan nears the top of the ridge. He sees the brush, just 2 or 3 yards ahead, where the bush whacker had hunkered down to fire upon Jacob. Just now, he hears something to slightly to the left of that position -- movement, he thinks, but it's tough to distinguish for certain with his bad ear. And then he sees a shape that could be the top of a man's head.

-------------------------

OOC: The Judge re-shuffled the initiative deck. (Currently, drawing from an actual deck of cards. RPOL has card drawing options in the dice roller, but as far as I can tell, so far, none of them include functionality to track cards that are drawn and sent to the discard pile in a continuous use, until re-shuffling. Still poking around -- if there is such a deck feature, I would prefer to use that, but for now just handling the initiative draw manually.)

Jake: Nine
Head: Five

Jake has the initiative.

OOC:

A couple of rules questions, Judge:

1. What will the modifiers be if Jake takes a shot at the man in the bushes this round?

2. Does SW make a distinction between cover and concealment? For example, bushes might conceal someone from your sight (i.e., would effect a Notice check), but, when you think about it, aren't all that effective as cover -- bullets pass right through them, in most cases.

I believe that one or more of the D&D editions made that distinction, but I don't recall seeing it in the SW rules.

Thanks.

PS. 3. Is Jake within moving distance of cover, himself?
This message was last edited by the player at 22:44, Mon 27 Aug 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 45):

OOC: In general, the Judge doesn't desire to pre-calculate attack rolls (regardless of the game system). Players can estimate modifiers for distance, cover, light, etc. but until the shooting starts, the exact modifiers aren't known. Jake has fired upon this position before, so he has some idea, as noted below.

To the Judge, there is a difference in questions #1 and #2.

The first question is about particular Judge rulings on the amount of cover. Until Jacob fires, he can't be sure. What he knows so far is the current conditions are: dim light (-1), close distance (0) and available cover (which was -1 or -2 for Jacob earlier against the bush whacker who was in pretty much the same place as the "head" -- with the -1 or -2 depending on the circumstances during any given round).

The second question is about the rules -- which I'm happy to talk about. I don't see specific rule differences for "concealment" vs "cover" in SW. There are 4 categories of cover and the Judge rules on which one applies. This Judge would certainly take into account the nature of the cover -- a brick wall is different than hedgerow, but both provide cover that is factored into an attack roll. The question is how much cover.

The third question is both a particular Judge ruling and a rules question. "Crouching" which is what Jacob has been doing as he "waddled" up the slope, includes -1 for attackers.  It would become -2 if Jake went prone, or perhaps -2 or even better if he could find natural cover on the slope and remain crouching while he reached it. The Judge rules that Jake could move to his left a few yards, or slide backward a few yards, to reach some natural cover (brush vegetation). Exactly how much cover that would give him, Jacob isn't sure.
This message was last edited by the GM at 12:52, Tue 28 Aug 2018.

~Most likely a hos-tile,~ Jake thought upon seeing the man skulking in the bushes, his Texas drawl drawing the final word out into two syllables.

The rifleman scuttled over to his left to find some cover, but this time he stayed crouched over instead of dropping prone. He recalled that the last time he had gone prone, he had lost sight of his target, and he didn't care to play that game again.

Upon reaching cover, he fired a shot at the other man.

---

OOC:

Move: To his left, to find some cover. Jake will stay crouched over.

Action: 16:43, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 4,1 using d10,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4,1.  Winchester Shot.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 47):

OOC: Reading Jake's roll, it appears that you made the roll either:

1. without any modifiers at all, including your own mods for Edges.
2. with mods that you figured even out (+2 for ITW, -1 for dim light, -1 for cover.)

Are either of those assessments by the Judge true?

If 1. is true, the Judge needs to apply the plus for ITW as well as any situational modifiers (dim light, cover), and any mods against ranged attacks that the opponent may have (e.g., Dodge).
If 2, is true, the Judge needs to confirm whether the cover mod was correct, and then include any mods for the opponent (e.g., Dodge).

Please confirm or explain if I have missed something. The result of 4 is close enough to make sure we have this correct before proceeding to Damage and then the opponent's action in the round.

For the record and to clarify, the Judge has no problem with the PC rolling with modifiers that are KNOWN (and then continue to be known in subsequent rounds). In this case, as I noted in #46, that would have been the -1 for dim light and +2 for ITW (but not Marksman because Jake moved). Which is why I am thinking your roll could be either case #1 or #2. All the Judge would need to know is what the PC considered in the roll, or didn't consider when making the roll. For example in the "reason for roll" you could include a note such as "no mods" or "mods included, except range" or "except cover" or whatever might be questionable. Or as Jake has done many times in the past, include a note in OOC about what was considered in the roll so the Judge can fully adjudicate.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 48):

#1 is correct -- not knowing what modifiers might benefit the target, I simply ignored all modifiers, so that you could adjust the results as appropriate.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 49):

OOC: Okay. The Judge was giving cover +2, so the result of 4 is a miss (-1 net). This is a play-test, so we're trying things out, here.

--------------------

Richardsen squeezes another round from the Winchester. He believes his shot missed, perhaps deflected by a rock by the sound of it. Feeling the rocky footing beneath his own boots behind the thicket where he had sought cover, Jacob wasn't too surprised; the chaparral had its share of jags and crags and pebbles, stones and boulders.

Now, however, came something the rifleman hadn't anticipated. From the bushes at the edge of the ridge, the shadowed head emerges at a run, straight for Jake's position. He leaps into the air over the lip of the ridge, landing only a few feet from Jake. He attempts to push Jake backwards.

---------------------

OOC: Push is an opposed Strength test. The Judge is ruling against the +2 for Running before a push (p75), as the opponent jumped and landed after running. It's debatable, but in this circumstance, going with the raw roll.

The Judge rolled '9' on the d10 (and 1 on the d6 Wild Die). It is a Trait test, the Judge just made the rolls separately because he forgot about that and then remembered as soon as he had rolled the Str die for CDM.

Jake, make Str test (with the Wild Die).

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 50):

OOC:

Here you go:

10:45, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 3,2 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 3,2.  Strength Check (Opposed).

That was . . . unexpected; Jake didn't get any Aces on his roll, which was his only hope.

On a more positive note, having finally figured out who AFJ is, taggin' this hombre with a name is as easy as the proverbial pie.
This message was last edited by the player at 14:54, Wed 29 Aug 2018.

OOC: Re-cap.

Jake and the Judge took part of this to PM, because there was a question about Jacob's design.

Jacob has First Strike, which gives him a free attack action against an opponent that moves adjacent. He used it, getting a hit, but no raise (as per the dice roller). He rolled damage and got a success, but no raise. That means a Shaken result against his opponent (butt to the face, perhaps, sounds like something worth a benny, iffin the Judge were in a generous mood).

His opponent failed the Vigor check. He spends a benny to unshake and take his action. Having lost some of his momentum, the Judge's earlier ruling not to award the +2 for running makes sense. CDM still gets his action, which reconnects us to Jake's previous post . . .

-------------------------

The burly bush whacker -- not the same one as had fired the Winchester earlier -- was caught off guard by the rifleman's quick use of his long arm's butt. It didn't deter the muscle-bound feller. He sinks his weight and pushes with both arms, forcing Jake to a prone position, but causing no other damage.

The Texan finds himself in a familiar position during this early morning. On the ground. His rifle is still in hand but quarters are too close to use it for shooting against the big feller, at least as things now stand.

--------------------------

OOC: So, the Push was successful. Jake's opponent had a choice to push him backwards, or to push him down (to prone). He chose the latter.

The Judge draws initiative:

Jake: Joker (you lucky bastard, twice in one combat)
CDM: Queen

It is Jake's action. He has the full use of the Joker, but he is prone and cannot use his rifle as a ranged weapon against an adjacent foe (ranged weapons in close combat, page 75). Being prone is not good in melee.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 52):

OOC:

1. I see that moving out of melee (in Jake's case, to free him up to use his long-arm, not to run away) gives his opponent a free Attack (what us D&D types think of as an Opportunity Attack), per p. 87 ("Withdrawing From Close Combat"). In Jake's case, he would need to stand up from prone before moving away from CDM.

In CDM's case, I get the impression that he does not have a weapon readied, and the attack would be with a fist -- is that correct? And will his target in this instance be Jake's Parry (5, in his case) instead of the normal "4"?

2. Re: Jake's drawing a Joker for Initiative -- as I recall, CDM was considered to be a hard-luck kind of feller (which might explain what happened to him in Northfield). By some measures of logic, if A is unlucky and is fighting B, then B should be lucky. :)

3. I was all set to dump "First Strike" for a different Edge after the end of our play-test. Now, hmmmm . . . I may still do so, but it is a closer question.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:47, Wed 29 Aug 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 53):

OOC: Always with the questions . . . it's like you think this is a play-testing ground. Oh, right . . . .

1. Not exactly. Correct about the opponent's free attack if Jake moves away (there is an Edge called Extraction for that). (Your page numbers in the EE seem different than mine, btw). But the free attack part is true.

Jake wouldn't necessarily have to stand. He could "crawl" as per the Movement section, which he did earlier. The Judge would interpret "rolling away" as crawling. If Jacob's goal is to withdraw from combat, standing is probably going to help. And as per the Movement rules, it requires 2" of movement to stand up from prone.

Jake didn't see a weapon, but that doesn't mean his opponent couldn't ready one this round. At present, he would be fighting bare-handed (open-handed). But the TN for Parry would be the same for a melee weapon or a fist (Melee attacks, armed or unarmed) go against the opponent's Parry. Ranged attacks are always against a TN 4 (and normal Trait tests are TN 4).

2. Oh, I see, this one isn't actually a question. Just rubbing the Judge's nose in it. Uh-huh.

3. It's a good Edge. Jacob used it exactly the way in which it is intended. As I said in PM, I could see how it fits into a rifleman's design. It is a guard against his weakness -- can't use rifle against adjacent melee. If you had Aced, you might have foiled his attack completely.

Here's a vital point -- all of the Edges are pretty good. The trick is to combine and balance them and decide how many Edges you want versus increase in Attribute die types and skill dice. Jake's approach, using the Archetypes, proved to be a good start for the PC, and then he assembled a good selection of Edges. The Archetypes can be helpful if you are inexperienced at SW character design. When you are doing your design, make sure to log each advance after the initial character creation. That makes it easy to fact-check for proper order of operations and meeting pre-requisites.

Here's another rules question, this one having to do with the Judge having drawn the Joker on Jake's behalf this round.

As I understand it, one of the perks of having drawn a Joker is an "interrupt at will" feature -- i.e., the PC or NPC who drew the Joker can act when he wishes to do so during the Round, even interrupting his opponent's actions if he choses to do so.

In this Round, Jake wishes to move away from CDM a sufficient distance for him to use his rifle (shooting it, not clubbing with it). As we have discussed, moving out of melee triggers an attack from CDM.

So. . . once Jake has initiated his movement, can he use the Joker's "interrupt at will" perk to shoot CDM before CDM can attack him (possibly foiling the "opportunity attack", as well as CDM's subsequent actions this Round -- depending upon the results of Jake's ranged attack, of course)?

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 55):

OOC: This is an interesting question; one of the "open to interpretation" rules in my opinion.

What it comes down to is "when does the action start and end?" If Jake starts his action by moving, then his action continues until he is done (whether that includes free stuff like moving, action(s) like Shooting or using Notice or whatever). He can't "split up" parts of his action. He can act when he wants, but he can't do different actions at different times in the round (at least based on my reading of taking actions in a combat). Therefore, I'm not sure what you are describing is something I would allow. I need to consider that further and I can ask a trusted resource how he would handle that. But right now, my thinking is:

1. If you were to say, I'll let him go first and then try to interrupt his action, then yes.
   
2. But if you are saying, start acting, see what he does and then interrupt his action, I'm inclined to say, no, because you can't split up your action because of the Joker -- you simply get to take your action(s) whenever you want. The Joker doesn't provide the ability to separate elements of your action for the round.

Something like First Strike is different. It gives a free melee attack action given a specific circumstance. That being a "bonus" action is different than using the benefits of the Joker more than once in a round.
This message was last edited by the GM at 17:16, Thu 30 Aug 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 56):

OOC:

Well, then . . . Jake will go with Option #1. :)

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 57):

The brawny feller pulls a knife and stabs at Jake.

OOC: Pausing for the roll, as the Judge expects Jake to interrupt with his action.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 58):

OOC:

Is a roll needed in this instance, given that Jake is working with a Joker on his Initiative draw?

Per the "Jokers" paragraph (p. 72 in my edition of the rule-book), it states "When a player draws a Joker his character can go whenever he wants in the round, even interrupting another character's action if he wants."

It's your call, obviously, but I would read that "can go whenever he wants in the round, even interrupting . . " language to mean that this situation is different from the opposed Agility rolls that are called for when a player who has opted to "Hold" during any particular round choses to have his character attempt to interrupt another character's actions (which are addressed separately in the "Hold" paragraph -- also on p. 72 of my edition).

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 59):

OOC: Interesting that you ask that, because I was also pondering this one. It's debatable, I think. For now, as you say, the Judge is ruling that the opposed roll to interrupt isn't needed for use of the Joker, as it would be for the Hold action. That doesn't mean the opponent won't still get his action -- that depends on the result of Jake's action, same as we did it earlier in this combat. It simply means that Jake gets to take his action before the opponent takes his action, with usual combat rules applying to the adjudication of the subsequent elements of the combat round.

OOC:

Thanks. As you have mentioned before, there are several instances where the rules are not crystal-clear. I think that this is one of them.

Will post IC for Jake later today or this evening.
This message was last edited by the player at 01:22, Sat 01 Sept 2018.

Jake had felt the power when this new attacker shoved him to the ground, and the Texan didn't much want to get trapped in a close-range fight with a man this strong, especially since he wasn't able to use his long-arm effectively in a toe-to-toe dust-up.

So as soon as the rifleman saw the big man pull a knife, he scrambled to his feet and moved away, then fired a round at his assailant.

---

OOC:

Move: Jake will stand up from prone (2" of his allotted movement), then move away from CDM (using the remaining 4" of movement available to him).

Action: 17:45, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 13,9 using d10+4,d6+4, rerolling max with rolls of 9,5.  Ranged Attack (Winchester).

17:46, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 10 using 2d8+2, rerolling max with rolls of 4,4.  Damage (Winchester, Joker).

Notes: Jake gains +4 to his Attack rolls by reason of his Improved Trademark Weapon Edge (+2), and by reason of drawing the Joker in his Initiative draw (+2). The Joker also grants +2 to his Damage for this round.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 62):

OOC: Based on the Judge's reading of the rules, CDM will get his "immediate free attack" before Jake gets his Shooting attack, because Jake is "Withdrawing from Close Combat."

Jake did in fact interrupt CDM's action, but Jake's own action triggers the WfCC rule, for the "immediate" attack.

All of Jake's good combat rolls will stand, assuming is able to take his action, after the adjudication of CDM's free attack. Unless CDM aces (and aces ace and so forth) during his action, the likelihood is good that Jake will be able to get his attack, because he has bennies to spend and he currently has zero wounds.

The Judge will make CDM's rolls later this morning.
This message was last edited by the GM at 11:00, Sat 01 Sept 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 63):

OOC: Because this is a play-test, the Judge is going to dig deep.

First, some facts, recap:

Jake has the Joker and therefore the initiative to act, whenever he wants it.

At the beginning of the round Jake is prone. His opponent is standing adjacent.

Jake decides to let his opponent go first, possibly to interrupt. The Judge and Jake have established (at least for now) that the Joker gives "automatic" interruption -- no opposed test needed, like First Strike.

The Judge has ruled that a player cannot break up elements of his action(s). Withdrawing from combat provides an immediate free attack from the opponent, with the Judge ruling that this also automatically interrupts.

Interrupting an opponent action doesn't invalidate the action. It just means the interrupting action happens first. Then all regular SW combat sequence continues. The effects of each action may influence or alter what can happen next (e.g., an interrupting attack results in a Shaken against the opponent and then the opponent fails the Vigor test and has no bennies so remains Shaken and can therefore perform only free actions), but the interruption itself is essentially a re-ordering of the combat actions.

Actions as stated in the round:

Jake lets his opponent (CDM) go first, with intent to interrupt.

CDM draws a knife. He attacks with the knife. (That is two actions, therefore, by rule, his attack will be at -2).

Jake moves when he sees CDM draw his weapon, with intent to shoot.

How this must be ordered and what might come next and thoughts about all of this:

The Judge reads Jake's text "saw the big man pull a knife" to mean Jacob started to move after that action became clear, and before the man got to stab with the knife. He didn't write: "As soon as Jake saw the man go for his knife" but that only matters for WHEN the knife can be used, as per the following logic. It is clear to the Judge that the order must be:

1. Jacob the Joker chooses to let CDM make the first move.
   
2. Jacob sees the first move and decides to interrupt (before or after knife draw is pending).
   
3. Jacob stands and moves, withdrawing from close combat.
   
4. CDM takes his immediate free attack because Jake is withdrawing from close combat (knife or open-hand pending)
   
5. Jacob takes his shooting attack, assuming #4 doesn't prohibit that.
   
6. CDM takes his action (attack -2 or draw and attack -2), assuming #5 doesn't prohibit that.

One way to adjudicate the knife or open-hand question would be to say that elements of actions can't be separated over a round. Therefore, Jacob must have interrupted before the knife was drawn. CDM gets his free attack before Jake moves and shoots, but it must be open-handed.

A second way is to say that elements can't be separated voluntarily, but that interrupting actions may occur between multiple actions being taken during a round. In this case, Jake's (apparent) decision to interrupt after the knife was drawn and before he made an attack with it is allowed. And so the knife would be usable in the free immediate attack when Jacob withdraws.

Jake, your opinion -- and clarification about your thinking in how you wrote the narrative as to when you tried to interrupt -- is needed before I roll the tests for CDM's 4th step above. Even if the Judge were to rule the second way (and establish that precedent), I wouldn't want to apply that here if in fact you didn't intend it the way I interpreted it -- in other words, if Jake intended to interrupt and move before the knife was drawn.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 64):

I think that Jake would have acted/interrupted as soon as it became apparent that CDM was going to draw his knife. As best I can recall, the reason that I wrote ". . .as soon as Jake saw the big man pull a knife . . ." (Msg. #62) was that I was tracking your language (on behalf of CDM), from Msg. #58) ". . . the brawny feller pulls a knife . . .".

Thus, if Jake is quick enough (and maybe he is, courtesy of the Joker), he would have acted as soon an CDM's intent became clear, but before he managed to draw his blade.

Does Jake's First Strike Edge apply before CDM's withdrawal from close combat (wfcc) attack occurs?

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 65):

OOC: First strike doesn't apply here. That only happens when someone moves adjacent. CDM is already adjacent. You received the benefits of the First Strike when he moved adjacent last round. In this round, CDM has not moved adjacent to the rifleman, so First Strike is not relevant, at least not at that time. If CDM moves in order to get his attack, moving adjacent again, that might be relevant. CDM didn't intend to move, but with the actions that interrupted his actions, he might change his action one way or another.

Okay, as far as when the interruption takes place. The Judge had to post CDM's action because Jake said he MIGHT interrupt it. It was possible that his action would have changed Jake's choice (of when to go in the round). Then I your "saw" past tense construction, which took me to the literal past tense interpretation. "Saw" the knife drawn, got up and moved . . .

The Judge will resume at step 4, with CDM's open-hand immediate free attack as a result of Jake's withdrawal from close combat.

Stand by.

EDIT: Added content.
This message was last edited by the GM at 16:32, Sat 01 Sept 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 66):

Jacob sees the man reaching for his knife. As the Texan scrambles to his feet, his burly opponent throws a powerful uppercut, catching Richarsen square in the jaw.

OOC: Wow, the Judge finally got some good rolls:

A double ace on the attack roll. That's a hit and a raise. The raise means +1d6 damage.

12:49, Today: Judge Messalen rolled 17,2 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of (6+6+5)17,2.  CDM Uppercut.

Regular damage roll: Strength for unarmed attack. An ace on the d10, gaining an extra +4.

12:53, Today: Judge Messalen rolled 14 using 1d10, rerolling max with rolls of (10+4)14.

The bonus damage d6 for the raise on the attack roll.

12:54, Today: Judge Messalen rolled 5 using 1d6, rerolling max with rolls of 5.  CDM hit raise plus 1d6 damage.

That's 19 points of damage. Jake has Toughness of 6. That means:

6 points results in Shaken.
10 points, one raise, results in one Wound.
14 points, two raises, results in two Wounds.
18 points, three raises, results in three Wounds.

Jacob will take 3 Wounds (and be on death's door) unless he spends a Benny and immediately makes a Soak roll. "Soak Rolls" (page 69 in my pdf). We can walk through the process. Essentially, this is a Vigor test. Jacob needs a success and at least one raise.

Then we will have to adjudicate further before proceeding to the next actions. This is exactly the sort of "Ace" scenario the Judge said could happen.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 67):

OOC:

Well, that's certainly not good (from Jake's perspective) -- and an amazing amount of damage from a fist. CDM must be a combination of Muhammad Ali and Mike Tyson.

I'll definitely expend the Benny on Jake's behalf, and will make a Soak roll. I want to read up on Soak rolls first, which I will probably do after I stop watching football tonight.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 68):

OOC: It was a lucky shot -- but partly successful because CDM was built for power (Str d10 is his best Attribute).

As a martial artist in RL who focuses on open hand pressure point fighting, I find the result plausible. Certainly not guaranteed, but plausible in these particular circumstances.

This illustrates the anything-can-happen in any given moment nature of SW's "fast, fun and furious" combat mind-set.

OOC:

Okay . . .

It looks like the first thing that Jake should do is to make a Spirit (Guts?) roll to avoid being Shaken. He needs a Success and a Raise in order to be able to act normally (subject to any wound penalties). A Success without a Raise will allow him to perform free actions (only). A Benny can be expended at any time to remove the Shaken status. I would anticipate Jake's expending the Benny if he does not get a Raise on his Guts(?) roll, so that he can act normally this Round.

Next, Jake will want to expend a Benny to make a Soak (Vigor) roll in order to (hopefully) reduce his wounds. A Success will reduce the number of wounds by one, and each Raise will eliminate an additional wound. Only one Soak roll can be made per Attack (so Jake can make only one in this instance).

Do I have that right?

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 70):

OOC: You have most of it correct, but not exactly, at least in terms of order of operations, especially under the Texan's current circumstances.

The Spirit roll (not Guts, that's for Fear tests), to recover from being shaken (I call that "to un-shake") is something that may happen on the character's action. Sometimes, that may be the first thing to happen. But it depends on circumstances.

If Jake had already taken his action for the turn, he can't make a Spirit check to un-shake until his next action. (In essence, Jacob has already started his action in this case, he was withdrwing from combat, but it is debatable because of the "free" action taken by CDM before Jake's action is complete; regardless, the Judge's ruling is that Jake can't make a Spirit roll to "un-shake" when his action is already underway). This usually makes perfect sense in a regular round.

• Let's say there are 3 combatants: Player A attacks Player B and misses. Player B attacks Player C and misses. Player C attacks Player A and hits and gets Shaken result. Player A can't make a Spirit roll immediately (at least it is not an immediate option), because Player A already acted in this turn. Player A can make the Spirit roll to un-shake on his next action; however, because Initiative order might change in the next round, it's possible that Player A will go last in the round, meaning, he could be attacked while Shaken, before he ever gets the Spirit roll on his action. (Getting attacked while Shaken is bad -- another Shaken results in a wound . . . ).

If Jake hasn't already taken his action, he has options. He can wait for his action and make the free Spirit roll when it is his turn to act. It all depends on WHEN he gets his next action.

• If there are 5 opponents that will get to act before Jake, he might decide to spend a Benny immediately instead of waiting. A Benny may be spent at any time to un-shake. Doing so would mean that another attack against him would go through the normal "Shaken, then Wounds" progression. If he waited, he could be hit again by another opponent, resulting in an immediate wound. The "at any time" is true EXCEPT retroactively -- that is, you can't wait to see the result of someone's attack and then say, "I spend a benny to un-shake before that attack." You would have to spend the benny before the attack occurred, un-shaking before the next attack/damage is adjudicated.

When a character suffers wounds, the character may spend a benny immediately after the Shaken/Wound results are adjudicated in order to make a Soak Roll. The Soak roll (a Vigor test) may "soak" the wounds taken (eliminate the wounds) AND it will also remove the Shaken status if all of the Wounds are soaked. The character must spend the benny at that time, and make the Vigor test (Soak Roll) immediately, before any other adjudication or any other character actions during the current round. As you say, one Soak Roll per attack.

• In the current case, Jake took a mighty blow. It resulted in a Shaken and 3 Wounds. Jake can spend a Benny to make the Soak Roll. A success will soak one Wound. A success and one raise would soak two wounds. A success and two raises would soak all three wounds -- and it would remove the Shaken result.

There are times, when a PC might decide NOT to make a soak roll (e.g., it's only one wound, he has Nerves of Steel Edge and he has only one Benny remaining and prefers to hold onto it). In general, it is advisable to make a Soak Roll because Wounds lead to incapacitation and the PC suffers -1 to all trait tests for every wound borne. It is DEFINITELY advisable to use a Benny to Soak when you take a massive blow such as this, because of the THREE wound suffered. That will be -3 to all Trait tests for Jake, for the rest of the combat (and until he heals) if he doesn't soak any of the wounds. If I had a benny, and took 3 wounds on one attack, I would definitely spend a Benny and make the Soak roll.

So, the way the Judge sees it:

1. Jake took 3 wounds and he has a benny to use. Even if his action were next, and therefore he could make the Spirit roll to un-shake (for free at the beginning of his action -- the beginning matters, because you can only do free actions if Shaken), it is still probably best to spend the benny and try to soak. If he gets a good roll (aces), he could soak the wounds and un-shake at the same time. Even if he didn't un-shake, he might soak a wound or two.
   
2. If Jake tries but fails to soak all three wounds, he will still be Shaken. He could either: spend another benny to un-shake (you can spend a benny at any time to un-shake, no matter whose action it is) or he could wait for the beginning of his action to get the free Spirt roll to ushake. Or, he could spend another benny to re-roll the Vigor test for the Soak Roll (yes, you get only one Soak Roll per attack; but you can always spend a benny to re-roll a "failed" trait test -- this is a Vigor test and therefore a Trait test, so it can be re-rolled; you can't make two different soak rolls for the same attack, but you can re-roll the Vigor test (if results weren't beneficial)).
   
3. If Jake has no bennies left, he will have to wait for the beginning of his next round to make the Spirit roll to un-shake, suffering the 3 wounds as well as -3 to all Trait tests (-2 for Jake because of Nerves of Steel).
   
4. Jake could elect to skip the soak roll completely, accepting the 3 wounds (and the -3 -- minus 2 to Jake -- to all Trait tests). He could instead spend a benny immediately to un-shake (automatic if the benny is spent specifically to un-shake), allowing him to act as he desires. But he would still have -3 (-2) to all Trait tests. If this were only ONE Wound, such a strategy might make sense. (Just un-shake so he can act, and bear the wound and take the -1 to Trait tests). Makes even more sense if you have Nerves of Steel because you could ignore the -1 from the first wound. But when it is THREE wounds and bennies are available, it is advisable to spend a Benny and make the Soak Roll.

In the Judge's opinion, Jake's first, best option is to spend a Benny and make a Soak Roll. He would then have other options depending on the result.

---------------------------

I tried to summarize the combat progression steps in the sticky forum msg # 12, anticipating these sorts of questions as we get started. I have drafted some content similar to that above, for other sticky posts, but I have been holding those until we do some more play-testing because my interpretations may change -- or be clarified -- by conversations just like this one.
This message was last edited by the GM at 14:22, Mon 03 Sept 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 71):

OOC:

Here is the result of Jake's Soak roll: 15:33, Today: Jake Richardson rolled 5,11 using d8+2,d6+2, rerolling max with rolls of 3,(6+3)9.  Soak Roll (Vigor Test).

Notes: As discussed, this roll cost Jake one Benny. The +2 was a result of having drawn the Joker on the Initiative Draw.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 72):

OOC: The results of Jake's Soak Roll are as follows:

The TN for Trait tests if 4. That means Jake's 11 = one success (4), and one raise (8). Just missed a second raise, as a result of 12 would have been needed.

A success and a raise soaks two Wounds; however, in order to also remove the Shaken result, Jake needed to soak all three Wounds.

So as of right now, Jake has suffered a Shaken result and one Wound from CDM's mighty blow. The one Wound persists (it cannot be removed without healing).

Jake has Nerves of Steel, so he may ignore the immediate effects of the first wound. Therefore, Jake ignores the -1 to Trait tests for the one Wound.

However, the Judge is using "Gritty Damage" setting rules (as per sticky notes, at least during this playtest; the Judge is wondering whether that rule is too lethal). The Judge rolled and got a result of "Guts" (in this case, a reference to the PCs mid-section) and then rolled on the sub-table and got the result of "Busted" meaning his Strength is now reduced by one die type. This effect is "temporary" -- after healing, Jake will go back to his normal Strength die type.

Jacob may now resume his action, but as he is Shaken, he can't do anything other than free actions until he "un-shakes." That means that Jake can continue his withdrawal from close combat, successfully, but it also means he cannot carry out his Shooting attack in this current round.

Unless, that is, he spends another Benny to un-shake right now (allowed by rule). He could spend a benny, remove the Shaken status and carry out his intended shooting attack (and the Judge said he would honor the rolls that Jake already made, which were pretty good if memory serves).

Otherwise, Jake will end his turn with the withdrawal movement. And then it will be CDM's action for this round (remember, CDM used his free attack as a result of Jake's withdrawal from combat; that wasn't his action for this combat round).

Jake needs to state his decision: use another benny to un-shake, or end his action and let CDM take his action (hoping that he doesn't get hit again and that he gets the initiative to make the Spirit roll to un-shake next round before CDM acts in the next round).

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 73):

Thanks for the detailed explanations. Jake will expend the Benny to remove the Shaken status this round.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 74):

OOC: Jake's decision to use another benny takes us back to msg # 62 which set off the string of events in the combat sequence. And  msg # 52, where Jake drew the Joker. In # 62, Jake rolled a hit and a raise on the Winchester attack. He rolled a total of 10 on the damage.

CDM has a Toughness of 6. That means Jake got a success and one raise with the 10 damage. That's a Shaken result and a Wound.

CDM doesn't spend a benny to Soak. On the Injury table, the Judge rolled 3 (arm) and 50/50 roll indicated right arm. The Judge is revealing that here for play-test purposes, but in actual game-play, in the current conditions, he might not reveal such a specific fact, it might have been something added to the narrative such as "Jake thinks he winged the feller, but it is too dark to tell for sure."

It is CDM's action. He takes his Trait test to un-shake (unlike Jake, who had moved and triggered CDM's free attack by withdrawing from close combat, CDM's action was interrupted and therefore has not begun, so he can take the Spirit test to un-shake. He succeeds on the Spirit roll with a result of 8 (6+2, with the Wild Die ace, which the Judge had done with follow-up roll,  because the re-roll max box was unchecked.

-------------------------------

The brawny fighter, who had nearly knocked the senses out of the Texan, darts to his right and back up the slope, seeking better cover against the rifleman. He ends up crouching just below the lip of the ridge he had jumped over several seconds ago. Richardsen can't be certain, but he believes the man drew a pistol, in his left hand, as he moved.

"Dammit, McIntyre, when did you get so good with a rifle?" he calls out.

-------------------------------

OOC: The Judge re-shuffled the initiative deck (after the round in which Jake drew the Joker.

Jake: Seven
CDM: Queen
AFJ: King, Ace

AFJ -- see next message, has the initiative, followed by CDM and Jake is last.

A rider gallops up the path that Jacob had been following when he fell into this damned ambush. The mount rides in from the direction that Jake was headed, bearing a rider who leans in close to the horse's neck, Comanche-style. The rider slows and reins the horse about 50 yards from Jake's position, taking partial cover near a thicket.

CDM scrambles up the lip, taking cover at or near the same spot he had held before he charged out to engage the rifleman.

"Give up the gun, McIntyre, yer outnumbered," the burly man yells.

OOC: It is Jake's action. He can sight and shoot at either of his opponents but both have cover. The rider is probably outside of short range, but Jacob isn't sure.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 76):

~McIntyre?~ Jake wondered after the big man had called out to him. ~These hombres must have mistook me for somebody else.~

Jake scrambled to find some cover, glad to be out of range of the burly man's fists, but not at all pleased to see reinforcements arrive to support the man who had just pummeled him.

"Reason I'm so good with my long-arm is 'cause I ain't McIntyre," he called out. "Y'all have got the wrong man."
This message had punctuation tweaked by the player at 00:27, Fri 07 Sept 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 77):

OOC: The Judge perceived the end of the combat round. All three participants moved and acted, none attacked.

Initiative

Jake: Ace
CDM: Two
AFJ: Three, Seven

Jake has the initiative.

In a situation like this, the Judge would probably continue the combat acton for at least one round, until it becomes clear that participants have suspended combat in favor of parley. As a ruse is always a possibility, for either side of the battle, so the Judge would continue combat round mode at least temporarily.

Of course, Jake could hold his action, waiting to see how the men react. But iffin' he had a mind to take some other action, he may go first.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 78):

OOC:

Jake's in a mood to parley, seein' as how he's outnumbered. :)

I'll work up an IC post for him either later today or this evening.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 79):

OOC: Outnumbered and wounded and injured (although both of Jacob's opponents have also borne a wound and injury in the battle).

NP on timing, thanks for the note.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 78):

When his denial (as to being McIntyre) wasn't immediately answered by lead, Jake took that as a good thing -- something that the Texan was of a mind to follow up on, as a matter of fact.

He called out again to his attackers, "If'n y'all know this here McIntyre feller, you will recognize his hat. A man gets partial to one, he don't go 'round changin' it like wmmin do their dresses."

"I'm gonna ante up for y'all an' toss mine out yonder whaere you can see it, an' can see that it ain't what McIntyre wears. I'd be obliged if'n ya'll don't put no holes in it -- it's a good Stetson, an' like I said, I'm right partial to it."

The rifleman was as good as his word. He took off his hat and sailed it out where it would be in full view of the men up above.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:57, Fri 07 Sept 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 81):

The rider answers with the assured voice of a leader, as he turns his horse up the hill towards Jake's Stetson.

"The better part of valor is discretion, in the which better part I have sav'd my life. Clearly, you are not McIntyre; he lacks the horse sense you exhibit."

Clearly stating an order, he adds, "Rendezvous."

----------------------

OOC: The Judge is continuing initiative draws here. I have a reason and it makes the play-test more useful.

Jake: Eight
CDM: Nine
AFJ: Four, Three

The order is CDM, Jake, AFJ.

----------------------

Out of the corner of his eye, Jacob sees the beefy feller running away, back down the same slope where the first bushwhacker had fled.

The Texan now has a clear view of the man atop the mount, who had paused near the Stetson.

-----------------------

It is Jake' s action.
This message was last edited by the GM at 00:54, Sat 08 Sept 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 82):

Jake observed the results of his ante, then rose up to a standing position, his Winchester cradled in the crook of his left arm.

Addressing the man on horseback he said, "I ain't learned enough to quote the Bible the way you can, but I'm right glad we got that little misunderstandin' settled without nobody gettin' kilt."

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 83):

"I concur," says the rider. By now, Richardsen can tell that this is the same man who had him pinned down, originally. He must have circled around at a fair pace while his pardner had engaged the rifleman.

"Please accept my apologies. Do I perceive correctly a Texas drawl?"

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 84):

"Yes sir, you do," Jake replied.

"Born an' raised in Texas, an' served under Gen'ral Hood durin' the War. The blue-bellies didn't get me, an' now I'm here."

Jake thought a moment, then added "No offense if'n you're a Yankee, yourself. We just now quit shootin' at each other, an' I'd druther not git all that started up agin."
This message was last edited by the player at 02:34, Sat 08 Sept 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 85):

The rider scoffs at Jake's remarks. "That business is done," he replies, without making it clear to which of Jake's words he refers.

"Under other circumstances, I might offer to raise a glass with you." He glances towards the east, where the first hint of sunlight spills over the horizon. "Alas, the morning steals upon the night."

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 86):

"More so for some of us than others," Jake replied.

"Another place, another time, maybe."

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 87):

"Mayhaps." The rider urges his horse over the edge of the ridge, pausing there as he looks around.

"What shall I call you, not-McIntyre, if our paths should cross again?"

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 88):

Jake thought about it for a moment. After the War, with so many people re-locating to the West, he had learned that it was generally frowned upon to ask too many questions about a man. A lot of men were eager to leave their past lives behind, to use their move out West to re-invent themselves. Some didn't even ask a stranger his name, figuring that the other man would volunteer whatever he wanted to divulge about himself.

But in this instance, having the rider ask the Texan what to call him didn't bother the rifleman. Sure, Jake had done a few things here and there that a sky pilot might frown upon, but it wasn't like he was on the run from John Law.

So, after a pause he answered "Richardson. Jake Richardson."

Then he waited to see what, if anything, the other man would volunteer concerning his own particulars.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:40, Sun 09 Sept 2018.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 89):

"You may call me Frank," replies the rider.

He turns his mount to the west and gallops away and down the other side of the slope, as if trying to stay just ahead of daybreak.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 90):

OOC: Too bad JEB wasn't there!

Yeah, being from Missouri might have made a difference in this instance. :)

Art becomes aware of the cry of hawk off in the distance. It's after dawn. He rubs his palms across his face and through his hair. Standing he stubs a toe accidentally kicking an empty whisky bottle. "Yeah. It's like that then," he say's to no one but himself. A trip to the stream, a stir of the previous night's ashes and coffee's 'bout ready.

Finishing the cup Art sniffs at the air. "Something smells like pig," Art says to large centipede milling about near his saddlebags.

"Sorry, I think it me," he apologizes.

--------

After washing up and packing his gear he loosely saddles Caliber, and begins to lead the steed towards town.

Art's dear Lily has been on his mind a good bit lately, he points to the sky - then to his heart. Ahead is deer trail that leads to the road and on to town.

Glancing back he says, "Let see if we can make it there by lunch for a late dinner¹, boy."

OOC: To be continued.

¹ Thanks to JM for linguistic coaching.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:36, Tue 11 Sept 2018.

OOC: First, glad to see Art posting here. That's what this chapter is for . . . free posting by the players. The Judge will participate as needed, but he isn't leading anything -- just reacting to your posts and doing play-testing whenever PCs are ready.

Second, I must comment on the concept of "lunch." It is definitely not the first time the Judge has done this in this game. It is a topic of etymological interest to me.

The idea of "lunch" is a relatively new thing. In the time period of the game we have been playing, the notion of "lunch-time" would have been about as common as the notion of germs causing disease (that is, not common knowledge).

The word "luncheon" was a thing that ladies did in polite society in the 19th century. The term "lunch:" It didn't really exist until the 20th century. Certainly not as we think of it today. From this, I assume that Art is late for a luncheon with the local ladies.

Besides, Douglass Adams wrote: "Time is an illusion. Lunch time doubly so."
This message had punctuation tweaked by the GM at 14:15, Wed 12 Sept 2018.

OOC:

Gentlemen,

The Judge is looking to us players to take the lead in deciding how our "alternative reality" setting should take shape.

I think that it's pretty much a blank canvas at this point. At one point I suggested a couple of scenarios, but there is no reason that they should be our final choice regarding how our new chapter shapes up.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this issue (either broad-brush, affecting the general setting, or more narrowly focused -- perhaps coming at this from the direction of their own characters and what sort of setting would work best for them)?

Thanks,
~Jake

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 95):

OOC: Jake, didn't want you to feel lonely, here . . . although it occurs to me that you may have confused some of the players by addressing everyone as "gentlemen."

To all, yes, Jake is correct that the Judge is looking to the players to establish things. The general backstory, starting point for the RP and current PC relationships. At the beginning of this chapter 20, Jake tossed out a couple of possible alternate starting points -- and in the OOC forum, the Judge had given various examples from the professor's prospective, intended as ideas to stimulate conversation among the players.

Some simple and general agreements may help for a start -- for example, in PM the professor asked whether the SF encounter had happened in this reality . . . If players were to agree on a few basic things like that, it would give a baseline from which you could discuss wider ranging ideas about the setting.
This message was last edited by the GM at 12:53, Sat 15 Sept 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 96):

I'd like to propose two items:
1) The players (at least whoever continues) already know each other in this reality.
2) The SF adventure did happen (which I feel brought the group together more), but perhaps with a little different outcome... perhaps we were ID'd by the Tongs, necessitating a sudden departure from SF.

I'm not picky about where we start now, Jake's Sante Fe setting would be fine to me (though if we're trying to avoid the Tong's, maybe Cuba or Mexico might be better).

As to overall setting (e.g., who won the war), I'm inclined to say leave it alone... it seems likely that our characters might be very different under such criteria.

...my 2 centavos!

In reply to E.N.S. Ringgenberg (msg # 97):

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, ENS. This sort of discussion is precisely what the Judge had in mind, I believe. My comments on your proposals are as follows:

1. It probably is more convenient for the PCs to know one another -- at least with respect to the "original" PCs who elect to continue in the game. If new players and new PCs join us (which is a possibility, as I understand it), we might need to meet them wherever the new chapter is set.

2. I agree that it would probably be best if the SF adventure did occur in this alternative reality. Otherwise, Jake would not have met Art. :) Being pursued by agents of the Tong might be an interesting twist, but I believe that these sorts of details probably merit a bit more discussion.

3. I don't have strong opinions as to whether we begin the new chapter in Santa Fe or Cuba. Both would be interesting, for different reasons (especially if, in this reality, the Mexicans acted aggressively to reclaim parts of old Mexico whilst the gringos were busy fighting each other). Or, if someone else has a strong preference, it doesn't need to be either one of those places -- I suggested them simply as grist for the discussion mill.

4. Likewise,  I don't feel strongly about whether or not we adjust the results of the Civil War/War Between the States. It had occurred to me that a Southern victory (or, probably more likely, a negotiated peace that gave the South its freedom) might lead to some interesting developments in an alternative reality, but that is by no means necessary.

5. If we decide to go with the Santa Fe scenario, we should perhaps consider whether we will be bumping up against a Mexico that is controlled by the Mexicans of Spanish descent, or one that is under the control of Imperial France, led by Napoleon III. I'm kinda partial to the French gambit, myself. What can I say, I liked "Beau Geste" (not set in Mexico, I know, but it *could* have been).
This message was last edited by the player at 03:17, Tue 18 Sept 2018.

This is indeed the sort of discussion I had hoped to see. I hope others join in. A few thoughts:

1. and 2. Makes sense for the PCs to already know each other (those that continue, as the professor notes, which from the Judge's perspective is still quite questionable based on login and character design evidence). That said, the "how" they know each other doesn't rely on the SF adventure. This is an alternate universe. You could invent any meet-up you wanted. Art and Jake could have met anywhere at any time before we start play. If the continuing players find it helpful to maintain continuity between "then" and "now" by establishing that the SF adventure happened, that's perfectly fine. But you shouldn't think of it as a requirement for anything else. And as for ENS' note about "slightly different" in that the Tongs identified the group, well, that wouldn't be different at all. The Tongs know exactly who the PCs are. If you want to leverage that fact for the alternate set-up, sure that's no problem, it could certainly be a catalyst or a factor in what happens next, it just wouldn't be different than what we already played. If new players were to join (as Jake said, a possibility that the Judge has considered depending on how many current players actually continue), it would be simpler if the new PCs met the existing PCs at the start, but it certainly isn't required. You could invent any backstory connection you wanted to invent for why the PCs already know each other.

For the moment, since the only two players who have weighed in have agreed that the PCs should already be acquainted at the start of the SW adventure, the Judge will assume that is true unless he perceives any dissent.

3. As Jake said, Santa Fe and Cuba are simply possibilities he suggested, not our only choices. They are options that Jake tossed out to get conversation started. If the players don't have a strong preferences (neither of Jake nor ENS has expressed such), the Judge might suggest a different starting place in order to facilitate an adventure. That said, the Judge asks the players -- does the starting place matter to you, or would you leave that to the Judge iffin' other basic agreements among players are reached?

4. Again, the Civil War is a pivotal point but the Judge disagrees that the characters would have to be very different if the results of the war were different. The idea for an alternate universe could pivot in various ways based on changes in what we perceive as history -- or a lot of things could be exactly the same even if a so-called pivotal event were to change (changes could open up some interesting developments, of course, but the Judge's view is that such alternate developments don't rely on whether the outcome of the Civil War--assuming there was one--changes). That said, as per #1, if it helps us move forward by keeping continuity for such underlying backstory, that's fine by me. What the Judge wants to see is the players establishing some common ground for their backstories, whatever that common ground might be.

5. This is a critical point, I'm glad Jake has opened up this element of the conversation. If the players (as a group) want to play an adventure in a specific setting or with a specific backdrop -- such as Mexico under the control of Imperial France -- the Judge is quite willing, but he will need to develop such an adventure, based on the PC-established milieu. If the group were to conclude: "yeah, starting in Santa Fe against the backdrop of Imperial France ruling Mexico sounds like big fun," then the Judge will have what he needs to develop something. On the other hand, if the PCs don't have a particular setting/situation in mind (or can't find common agreement), the Judge can use some content that he has at hand without having to develop something totally new -- adapting that content to whatever PC-established elements are agreed upon.
This message was last edited by the GM at 12:50, Tue 18 Sept 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 99):

I'm inclined to think that we should move forward with this shin-dig. When I say "we", I mean ENS, the Judge, and me. Everybody else is certainly welcome to join in the fun, but spinnin' yarns and what-ifs and how-about-this ain't everybody's cup of tea -- or shot of whiskey. So be it. Let's do it, pards.

So, sticking with the same numbers as before:

1 and 2. The judge is perfectly right that we don't have to stick with the SF scenario in order to say that some of the PCs know each other in this reality. The possibilities are . . . well, not exactly limitless, but there shore are a lot of them. Hell, ENS and Jake could have met up on the moon, after traveling there in a spacecraft designed by Jules Verne.

But the SF scenario provides a detailed back-story that is familiar to the returning characters (whoever they end up being). I'm inclined to leave it in place, simply because it serves as a fully-fleshed out (a double entendre for sure, given the things that were available in the 'Frisco of that day and time) backdrop that does not require another five months of discussion in order agree upon a likely story that all of the returning/continuing characters have in common.

3. The Judge mentioned something about possibly coming up with a different starting-point other than Sante Fe or Cuba, in order to "facilitate an adventure" if neither Jake nor ENS (OOC) have strong preferences on the matter. I say, go to it, Judge. If you have another spot in mind that you think would be more appropriate,  I certainly am not fixated on either Sante Fe or Cuba. But if we were to pick between those two, Sante Fe seems to be the preference.

4. I think that we need to have some sort of a war involving the North and the South in order to facilitate Mexico's northward expansion (which I think is something that we can have fun with). It doesn't necessarily need to be the historical Civil  War/War Between the States.

Perhaps the North and the South agreed to set aside their differences in return for a conquest of Canada by the United States (it wouldn't be the first time this was considered or attempted, obviously). Great Britain would probably have put an end to such an endeavor in a "real history" setting, but it certainly could happen in our alternative reality. As I think on this, it occurs to me that this would open up a great expanse to the north that could be a setting that we could use, if so desired.

5. If we use a setting involving old Mexico or the areas annexed by an aggressive Mexico, I still like the idea of Mexico being under the control of imperial France. This would be of lesser importance if we, for example, used a newly-conquered Canada as our setting.

I don't know whether I advanced or impeded our progress by raising the possibility of a "Canadian gambit" -- either as a stand-alone, or in conjunction with a Mexican expansion into the southwestern U.S. :)

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 100):

OOC: The Judge had been waiting for ENS to reply before taking my turn, but I'll go ahead as it has been a few days since the professor's last log in.

I agree with Jake's assessment. Next week it will be two months since the fade-to-dawn. Let's move forward, whoever is ready with a design and participating in the forums. At this time, that seems likely to be only Jake and ENS. The Judge holds out hope that other players will participate, having at least a draft character design ready ... and input from other players is still welcome. The Judge is attempting here to summarize what he perceives as common ground -- and then using that to advance agreements on a starting point and some background.

Let's agree: the SF story happened recently. Let's say, a no more than a fortnight ago in the SW heroes universe. The men had to split up to get away from more than one Tong in the aftermath of chapter 19.

The suggested starting point: a place called Sacramento. When we start to play (say, a week or so from now), anyone who is logging in at that time and had shown the Judge at least a draft design can participate. The players can continue working on the design (tweaks) and we can do some additional play-testing as part of the start-up, as needed. Anyone who isn't ready at that time is still welcome to join and the Judge will simply find a way to have them meet up with the starting characters along the way. Again, the prerequisite is to have shown the Judge a SW character design.

History / Background suggestion: The Judge will craft the general environment based on Jake's Sante Fe idea with the "Imperial France" twist for the southwest and Mexico. The starting point above will lead to the adventure It will also give us a chance to do some RP and play-testing as a preamble to the adventure. The Judge will take Jake's ideas and run with them. And the PCs that are playing should feel feel to continue the "yes, and" improvisation during our startup, to fill in details and round things out.

And when others join in, they may add to whatever has been established up to that time.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 101):

Sounds good to me, Judge. Let's saddle up, pards.

In reply to Jake Richardson (msg # 102):

I concur... ENS work is in progress.

In reply to E.N.S. Ringgenberg (msg # 103):

And there was much rejoicing.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 104):

Just a reminder that this chapter can still be used by anyone who wants to use it.

Play-testing a design. Questions / comments about backstory. Questions about Jake's play-testing for your character design or role playing edification.

A thought.

We could use the bar scene to do a playtest for unarmed combat -- ye old fashioned barroom brawl.

We could do that here, while game RP continues in ch 21.

Anyone interested?

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 106):

I'll defer to the two new players and ENS on this issue. I've already run through a play-test for Jacob, but would be fine with another one if that is the consensus. :)

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 107):

Anyone else?

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 108):

" I reckon' a friendly fight never hurt anyone... "

OOC ...I wouldn't want to get carried away in this alternate time line then have to switch back to the main story line... where this fight didn't happen. I figure the first combat with the new players might require a bit more OOC communication, but we can probably all handle it.

If you think there is value to do it here and won't cause too much continuity disruption then...

" a good way to get a sense of who you're dealin' with... " As the conversation trails off Walker begins to look away, he gathers himself, then turns and sucker punches Jacob.

OOC: I could go either way. I think that, with my Trailer Park Shark Attack! experience, I could handle combat currently, but it would also be fun to practice I'm sure. Although I also agree with Jacob; it could be a little confusing switching between the practice here and the reality. If anyone has any stronger opinions, or if you, Judge, feel like it would helpful, then I'm game.
This message was last edited by the player at 17:19, Thu 01 Nov 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 108):

As a footnote to my original response, I will add that Jake has no desire to tangle again with Mister Clell Miller, at least not if the setting involves fisticuffs. :)

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 110):

I'm fine with a play test (be nice to set up the die roller) that's completely divorced from the other thread (alternate-alternate reality?)

There is a lot of posting going on in the game, I would rather keep that going than take time away to do the test. I agree with Tracy re: TPSA re: game mechanics. We might need a bit of private message hand-holding (which I hear the Judge is especially fond of) but I say let's just contribute in the game.

I'm sure something is going to pop up here soon, especially if I keep making jokes about the Judge's fetishes :)

OOC: This is actually a good reason to do a playtest, illustrated by Walker's blunder. (And I don't think it will be disruptive to the regular game thread).

No PC may "god-mode" another PC. If Dave Walker has indeed decided to strike a fellow PC in this alternate² scenario, then the other player cannot be denied his own chance to react as he desires. While the Judge might award "the drop" and "surprise" if Dave was throwing a punch at an NPC, when something involves another PC, no way.

It would mean an Initiative draw. And because some PC invest in Edges that improve Initiative, for just such an occasion, that is vital to any SW combat.

Another reason from my perspective is that while Jacob has done a playtest, and Dave and Tracy have played SW rules in TPSA, the professor -- don't forget about easterner -- hasn't had that experience yet. In #112 above ENS voiced interest in the playtest.

So, the Judge will say: I will draw initiative and whomever wants to playtest the barroom brawl, is welcome to continue; if not, just excuse yourself when the draw is made.

OOC: Good points, Judge. Let's do it, then. So we'll be getting started with your initiative draw, followed by our decisions on actions?

Oh, and it will be occurring within this same situation?

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 115):

OOC: Essentially, yes, in the same situation, with some jumping off point. Maybe it happened just as Tracy walked in -- before Poirier had begun to talk -- e.g. Walker tries to sucker punch Richardsen after the bartender poured the two whiskeys. Doesn't really matter to the Judge, but yes, in the Depot Dan's.

The Judge will wait to draw initiative for another 12 hours or so -- or until everyone has weighed-in again.

I'm ready to rumble, deal me in.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 116):

Deal Jake in as well, s'il vous plait.

PS. Interesting -- my English-language Spell-Checker wanted to reject "s'il" and "vous", but left "plait" alone. <Scratches head.>
This message was last edited by the player at 01:25, Fri 02 Nov 2018.

The Judge counts all four PCs ready for the brawl. And none of the four has an Edge that aids in Initiative. So it is a raw draw for all four. The Judge will throw in another Extra or two. (SW term, Wild Card vs. Extra).

Stand by. Or sit, as you please.

Initiative R1
Alphonse:  Jack clubs, third
Dave:  Jack spades, second
Earnest:  Ace hearts, first
Jacob:  2 hearts, last
Tracy:  5 diamonds, fifth
Bartender and other Extras:  8 hearts, fourth

OOC: The Judge is starting as follows, with the assumption of Dave's first action already stated. Carry on from there, waiting for your turn to act. Ask questions as needed (you can ask when it's not your turn); the point of this is to get more experience in the combat system. Essentially, the Judge is assuming everyone makes the initial Notice check to get a card in the draw.

-----------------------------

The professor had just ordered his beverage, having seen the bartender in the black string tie pouring a healthy volume for Jacob and the man next to him.

Suddenly, the unknown feller on Jacob's right throws a punch at the Texan. The professor sees it happen, but he cannot stop it. Poirier is in the way.

Tracy Windham walks in a moment or so after the drifter throws a punch at the rifleman -- who is rifle-less.

-----------------------------

OOC: Dave should make his unarmed fighting attack.

The professor may state an action but he cannot interrupt Walker's action. If the professor's action requires a dice roll, please do.

Each character should pay attention for his turn in the initiative order.
This message was last edited by the GM at 20:24, Fri 02 Nov 2018.

OK I used the dice roller, I have no idea what I'm doing.

Fighting (d8)

10:45, Today: Dave Walker rolled 4,4 using d8,d6, rerolling ones with rolls of 4,4.  Attempting to punch the Texan .

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 121):

OOC: You should NOT be using the "reroll ones" feature for SW. Ones are bad and if they occur, especially snake eyes for with a Wild Die on your trait tests -- so you should never re-roll ones in the dice roller.

You may use the "re-roll max" because that will produce the 'Ace' result on either the Trait die or the Wild Die.

You should also use the "record each die" checkbox.

The Judge will go ahead and use Walker's roll as is for this one.

Out of the blue, Dave Walker throws a hook punch at Jacob Richardson. The men had just watched the bartender pour two whiskeys. The rifleman's attention was split between the glass and the arrival of the professor and Tracy Windham.

Nonetheless, this ain't the Texan's first rodeo. His reflexes kick in and he manages to avoid the impact of the sudden punch. By no means a wild punch -- as the men are in close quarters -- but nothing more than a glancing blow to Richardsen's left arm.

OOC: The professor has 24 hours to post his action; after that, he is considered on Hold.

Jacob's Parry = 5 so, Dave's 4 is a miss.
This message was last edited by the GM at 15:37, Fri 02 Nov 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 123):

Surprised by the sudden violence, Earnest simply positions himself to catch his friend should he stumble.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 124):

Alphonse Poirier exclaims in French as he moves away from Richardsen, allowing the professor to pass him in support of the rifleman. The silk merchant moves nimbly, taking a defensive posture in case any other malcontents decide to join the fray.

The bartender ducks behind the bar. The man who was sitting next to Walker at the long table climbs over the table and tries to grapple the professor.

OOC:
16:21, Today: Judge Messalen rolled 5 using 1d6, rerolling max with rolls of 5.  TG grapple opposed ENS.

The professor needs to make his opposed Fighting check against the man trying to grapple.

Meanwhile, it is now Tracy's turn. If he wants to see the result of Earnest's opposed roll, that's fine; if not, feel free to state action and make any rolls. (BTW, the Judge had a mistake in the original notes for Initiative order. Updated in msg # 120.)

Tracy makes a beeline for the man grappling with ENS and tries to punch him in the jaw, while his hands are still down holding the Professor.


OOC:

21:20, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 3,9 using d4,d6, rerolling max ((3,(6+3)9)). Fighting roll against man grappling with ENS.

I forgot to note my reason for roll on the Dice Roller, sorry! Hopefully it's clear enough here.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 120):

Luckily, Jake had been blessed with quick reflexes, and after catching a glimpse of what the stranger  at his side was doing, he was able to get his left arm up in time to block the man's punch.

The Texan was infuriated by the stranger's cowardly, under-handed attack. His face a mask of fury, Richardsen rounded on the fellow and snarled "You yaller-bellied polecat! I'm gonna tear you a new one!"

Jake then aimed a hard left-handed jab straight at his attacker's face.

---

OOC:

Actions: Jake's spoken words are a Taunt, which will initiate a Test of Wills with Dave. As recited above, the Texan will follow that up with a punch.

Since the Test of Wills may or may not affect Jake's Fighting roll, I will simply post the results and let the Judge adjudicate. :)

22:02, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 5,2 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 5,2.  Taunt.

22:03, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 9,1 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of (6+3)9,1.  Fisticuffs (Fighting).

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 127):

OOC: Again, we are playtesting here in Chapter 20, so delving deep.

What Jacob did is legal, that is, he took TWO actions in one round. SW rules allow movement and one action in a round, without penalty.

A character may take two actions, the second of which is a -2 to the Trait test. So Jake's Fighting roll would have been d6-2, d6-2. The ace still happens but both the initial roll and the ace roll are -2 (the dice roller would have handled this, I believe, if Jake had entered d6-2, d6-2). So the result is:

(6-2=4) + (3-2=1) = 5.

EDIT: To be more fully accurate, it is a -2 to all character rolls.

Therefore the Taunt roll is also reduced.

5-2=3.

And a character may take more than two actions -- a character may take multiple actions -- with each action incurring another -2 to all rolls.
This message was last edited by the GM at 13:01, Sat 03 Nov 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 128):

OOC: My parry is 6, does that mean he misses?

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 126):

OOC: Playtesting notes:
Tracy's stated action of trying to punch in the jaw SOUNDS like a called shot to the Judge. This is a particular SW action as described in the Situational section of the combat rules. However, it could be interpreted as simply flowery narration by the player in describing a regular unarmed fighting attack.

If it is the former:
A called shot to the head is -4 to hit but +4 damage (on the subsequent damage roll). That's a pretty nice bonus, because raises on damage inflict wounds. Of course, one still needs to hit in order to get the bonus.

In Tracy's current case, some things would be at the Judge's discretion for this called shot. Assuming the -4 applies to the ace roll, it would turn out:

(6-4=2) + (3-4=-1 effectively 0) = 2 which would be a miss. The Judge might award a +1 for Ganging Up in this case (Tracy is on the flank of Earnest's opponent), but it still isn't enough for the called shot to hit with a 3. Not clear in my rulebook whether a called shot modifier applies to ace rolls, but it follows the general logic of the combat rules.

If it is the latter:
A regular fighting attack is simpler. The only variable is whether the Judge awards the Ganging Up +1, which he is likely to do, therefore:

6+3+1 = 10

That's a hit against the Parry = 5 of TG. And a raise at 9 (so effectively, the Ganging Up didn't matter on this roll.). A raise on a melee attack adds +1d6 to damage (and that roll may ace).

Unarmed attacks use the combatant's Strength. So Tracy would get his Str die +1d6 for the raise with his damage roll (either of which may ace as usual).

-----------------------

The Judge is ruling the latter in this playtest. Tracy should roll for damage.

OOC: Please see my previous posts this morning. This one is a follow-up to Dave's original action. A side thought I had while considering some of the playtesting results.

If a PC wishes to use a benny during combat to re-roll a trait test, we will likely need to enforce a rule such as:

You must state your intended use of a benny to re-roll when you make the original roll. If the Judge's adjudication is that the original roll failed, the benny roll will then occur (or you could pre-roll the benny re-roll). However, you cannot use the benny after waiting for the Judge's adjudication. That could slow the game down too much here on RPOL. If your initial roll is sucessful, the benny is kept (not actually used) and any pre-rolls are moot.

Thoughts?

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 129):

First part is a Taunt, as per Jacob's OOC post. It is an opposed Smarts roll.

So Dave needs to make a Smarts trait test (Smarts die + Wild die, with aces possible as always).

Second part is the punch against the Parry, which will be a miss against Parry 6, yes
This message was last edited by the GM at 13:42, Sat 03 Nov 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 132):

OOC: wasn't sure what an opposed action meant.

09:42, Today: Dave Walker rolled 7,3 using d10,d6 with rolls of 7,3.  Smarts roll vs Jacobs Taunt.

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 133):

OOC: I had updated my # 132 while Dave was posting -- his roll is good and the Taunt fails; therefore no bonus to Jacob for the Taunt and so Jacob's unarmed attack fails, too (TN was 6 for Dave's Parry score; Jacob's result was 5).

There have been a flurry of posts today starting with msg #128, make sure to read them all -- one of them is asking for PC thoughts.

~ The big guy moves pretty quick, he's got decent training, but he leaves himself open... ~

"Keep on talkin' big guy" as he doges his attack and tries to jab him in the ribs.

OOC: Since Jacob failed his attack I am going to use my Counter attack edge, for another Fighting attack at him at -2.

10:33, Today: Dave Walker rolled 2,-1 using d8-2,d6-2 with rolls of 4,1.  Counter attack to Jacob's failed attack.

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 136):

OOC: Nice Edge. Didn't work this time, but may well come in handy at some point.

OOC:

Why does Jake's unarmed Attack roll of 9 fail to succeed against Dave's Parry of 6?

Thanks.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:34, Sat 03 Nov 2018.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 138):

OOC: Did you read the Judge's msg # 128?

I explained why Jake's TWO actions result in a -2 for every trait test in the round. You should have taken -2 to each trait test (and the -2 applies to original die and any ace die). Therefore:

(6-2=4) + (3-2=1) = 5 as the net result of the roll, instead of 9.
This message was last edited by the GM at 17:04, Sat 03 Nov 2018.

Nope, your previous post got buried so far back in the chain of posts that I missed it. I did not realize that using the Taunt Skill imposes a penalty upon subsequent actions in the round. I had interpreted it as being the equivalent of a bonus action in D&D.

The RAW pretty well emasculates the Taunt Skill, IMO.
This message was last edited by the player at 17:10, Sat 03 Nov 2018.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 140):

OOC: I disagree. When Taunt is used in combination with other allies actions, it is potent. We saw this happen in our TPSA game. One character Taunted an enemy, getting a Shaken result, and then the next player to act shot at it, doing damage that immediately caused a wound because the creature was already shaken.

Also, it is possible to Taunt in one round, get initiative in the second round and attack again before the Taunted (shaken) opponent gets to act again.

It is a matter of usage of the Taunt skill.

However, as the Judge has said all along, your character designs are still drafts in the early going. If you want to change Jacob's skill selection as a result of this playtest, feel free to do so.

For clarity: In combat, you get Free Actions, Movement, and one Combat Action per round without penalty.

Anything that involves a Trait test is a combat action. Any skill requires a Trait test. For Taunt, it is an opposed Trait test in combat, therefore a Combat Action.

OOC:
18:36, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 6,5 using d4,d6, rerolling max with rolls of (4+2)6,5.  Damage: fighting against grappling man.

Also, thanks for the note on the "Called Shot" determination. I'll keep in mind how I phrase my posts when doing combat in the future, and I'll be sure to note specifics OOC if I think my intent may be unclear.

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 143):

OOC: For clarity:

Damage rolls are to be done a little differently than trait tests.

For a Wild Card (PCs are wild cards) the trait test is attribute die and wild die. Choose the highest.

For trait tests, there is no wild die (wild die applies only to trait tests). But all rolls for damage are added together.

Since Tracy had the d4 for Strength with the unarmed combat plus the d6 for the raise on the hit, the two rolls are added together. With the ace on strength and the 5 on the +1d6, total damage is 11.

That's a success and a raise on damage, meaning Shaken result and a Wound. Extras have only one wound. I was going to see what the result of Earnest's opposed roll turned out to be before advancong to the next round, but that isn't necessary now as Tracy has removed TG from the fight.

------------------------

WIndham had rushed up to aid the professor, flanking the man who had climbed over the table and tried to grapple the easterner. With one well-placed punch, the small man drops the feller to his knees. The grappler teeters, then falls into the lower bar rail at Earnest's feet. Hard to tell whether he's dead or just getting some impromptu sleep.

-------------------------

Initiative R2
Alphonse:  Five spades, third
Dave:  Queen diamonds, second
Earnest:  Three diamonds, fifth
Jacob:  King diamonds, first
Tracy:  Two diamonds, last
Bartender and other Extras:  Four clubs, fourth

Jacob has the initiative. (Fascinating, it turned out as my previous post suggested was possible ... Jake went last in the last round and got the initiative this round, essentially meaning he got to act twice in a row. If Jake had only done Taunt in the last round, he could have Shaken Walker -- forcing the drifter to use a benny to unshake this round because Jacob gets to go again immediately -- or getting a Fighting attack against a Shaken opponent this round.)

OOC:

Thanks, I had not realized this. I equated a Taunt to speaking, which is a Free Action as long as it is kept reasonably short.

Eh, c'est la vie. Lesson learned. Let's move along.
This message was last edited by the player at 01:26, Sun 04 Nov 2018.

Round 2

Jake was a little surprised at by the other man's quick counter-punch, but he was able to deflect it before it landed.

He aimed at right hook at the stranger's midsection, but the other man moved so that the glancing blow did no damage.

The good news was that out of the corner of his eye, Richardsen had seen Tracy Mister Windham knock down the man who was trying to grapple with the Perfesser -- apparently the small man packed a big punch.

---

OOC:

Action: 21:05, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 2,4 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,4.  Fisticuffs (Fighting).

Meh, that's not going to do any good -- Dave's Parry is too strong.

Edits: As marked.
This message was last edited by the player at 17:15, Sun 04 Nov 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 131):

Anyone have thoughts about the Judge's thinking on usage of bennies for re-rolls? Anyone? Buehler?

Jake's attack reminded me -- that's a time that if I were a player I might have decided to use a benny to re-roll -- wondering if anyone has opinions.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 146):

OOC: It is Dave Walker's turn.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 147):

I was thinking the same thing later in the day...

"I got somethin' for ya right here pardner..."

Walker squares off and is looking to make this one count...

OOC: Walker throws another punch: 12:22, Today: Dave Walker rolled 2,3 using d8,d6 with rolls of 2,3.  One more punch on the Texan.

Let's use a benny to reroll... 12:23, Today: Dave Walker rolled 4,6 using d8,d6 with rolls of 4,6.  Attack on Jacob, benny re-roll.
This message was last edited by the player at 17:24, Sun 04 Nov 2018.

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 150):

OOC: Looks like you forgot to turn on the "re-roll max" when you made the benny re-roll. The '6' on the wild die would ace. Roll the ace manually, please, Mr. Walker.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 151):

Right... sorry, here you go!


13:52, Today: Dave Walker rolled 7 using 1d6, rerolling max with rolls of (6+1)7.  Reroll the D6.

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 152):

OOC: So it's 6+6+1=13, which is a hit and a raise. That means Dave gets Strength die + 1d6 for the raise (combined, roll both Str and d6 and we add together).
This message had punctuation tweaked by the GM at 19:48, Sun 04 Nov 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 147):

Sorry I missed the boat on the grapple, but this has been an informative thread!

So just to clarify on the benny use; you're saying if we did a roll and didn't think it would hit, we could declare the use of a benny and reroll. However, if it turned out that the first roll did indeed hit, the second roll is moot and the benny is kept by the player. Correct?

If that's it, it seems okay to me.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 153):

OOC: When you say this: "That means Dave gets Strength die + 1d6 for the raise " does that mean you are asking me to roll for damage / outcome of the strike?

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 155):

I do believe that Dave is related to Clell Miller. A cousin, perchance?

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 155):

Yes. Usually the PC rolls the damage rolls when getting a successful hit. Like Tracy did.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 154):

Yes, that summary is correct.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 157):

OOC: OK here is my die roll:

20:29, Today: Dave Walker rolled 5,2 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 5,2.  Damage on Jacob.

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 159):

OOC: 5+2=7 for damage. That's a success against Jacob's Toughness of 6. That means that Jacob is shaken.

Jacob has a choice:
Use a benny to unshake (now or anytime he chooses)
Wait until his next action to get the default Vigor roll to unshake at the beginning of his turn.

Poirier, clear of the action now by more than five feet, takes a defensive posture, looking around the saloon to see if any other patrons have decided to join the fray.

OOC:
08:14, Today: Judge Messalen, for the NPC Poirier, rolled 3,3 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 3,3.  Notice.

It is now Earnest's turn. He and Tracy stand together, over the feller who jumped over the table and grappled the professor before getting knocked-out by Windham. Jacob and the drifter are still engaged in fisticuffs, with the latter landing a blow just now.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 160):

OOC:

Judge,

Is it kosher for Jake to wait until after the Initiative Order has been determined for the next Round before making this decision? If so, and if Dave acts before Jake next round, can Jake expend the benny to unshake at some point prior to Dave's next action?

Alternatively, if Jacob rolls the Vigor Check next Round and fails, can he then expend the benny to unshake?

Also, rolling the Vigor Check would count as a Combat Action on Richardsen's part next round (per the Taunt example), oui?

Thanks.
This message was last edited by the player at 17:09, Mon 05 Nov 2018.

OOC: Breaking up the quoting to facilitate replies:


Yes, a player may spend a benny at any time to remove a Shaken status. So you may certainly wait to spend the benny to unshake, waiting to see the next initiative draw and can wait until some time before Dave's action to use the benny -- as long as you state it before Dave acts.


Yes.


No. The Vigor check to unshake at the beginning of a PC's turn is a free action as per the rules. It doesn't affect the PC's other actions (except if the attempt fails, as the Shaken status will mean the PC can only perform free actions during the round).

In reply to Alphonse Poirier (msg # 161):

Earnest will throw a punch at the man attacking Jacob (i.e., Dave):

12:34, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 2,5 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,5.  Punch at Dave.

Earnest will expend a benny (1 of 3) to reroll:

12:37, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 1,4 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 1,4.  Punch at Dave benny reroll.

OOC: I expect that Earnest has not hit unless the Judge gives a "+x"... BTW, bennies spent here do not count towards the main thread, right?

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 163):

OOC:

Okay, thanks.

Based upon those answers, I believe that I shall await the results of the Initiative Draw in the next Round before making any decisions about expending a benny.

If Richardsen acts before Dave in the subsequent Round, I shall probably have him roll the Vigor Check, and only expend the benny if he fails.

But if Walker acts before Jake, I'll probably go ahead and expend the benny. However, I need to go and read up on the effects of being Shaken -- I have read through the rules previously, but need to do so again as points of interest come up in play, to refresh my memory.

Tracy targets the man attacking Jacob as well, following up ENS by throwing a quick punch of his own at the man (Dave).

OOC:
14:59, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 7,3 using d4,d6, rerolling max with rolls of (4+3)7,3.  Fighting roll: Punch at Dave, following ENS.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 164):

OOC: First, correct, this combat is play-test only. NOTHING that happens here will affect the ongoing characters in the game forum Chapter 21 (or beyond), including the use of bennies.

Second, because Earnest, Tracy and Jacob are all attacking Dave, the Judge will award the +1 Ganging Up bonus to Tracy and ENS (it was too early for Jacob to get the bonus). In order to get their attacks, the men will have to move to a flanking position, which is easily done by ENS in these circumstances ... and can be effectively done by Tracy as well. FYI, in the regular (non-playtesting) game, the Judge will usually have a map with PC positions and the Judge might take a harder line regarding the ability to position PCs for such a Ganging Up maneuver -- or at least require the PCs to establish their movement as part of combat post and, as always, subject to the Judge's ruling about the result.

Therefore in this case, Earnest's total is 5+1=6, which is a hit against Dave's Parry =6 (5 was the best roll -- when using a benny, your best roll always applies, even if it is the original roll).

And then Tracy's attack is 7+1=8, which is also a hit. No raises for either, so both men should roll their Strength die for damage. (Tracy has gotten pretty lucky with a couple of aces in this barroom brawl . . . .)

Note, the Judge often elaborates combat results with additional narrative -- most of the time, references to damage placement and such are strictly for colorful narrative (e.g. "rib-cage" below). When there is a called shot or other specific target hit, the Judge will be clear on that point in OOC.

-------------------------

Ringgenberg moves alongside Richardsen, positioning himself to engage in the melee and gang up on the drifter. The professor connects with a punch to Walker's rib-cage.

Meanwhile, the bartender reappears behind the bar, standing up with a double-barrel shotgun in hand. A considerate man, he doesn't fire the weapon, taking stock of the current situation for a few moments. One of the friends of the man who jumped over the table (and who remains unconscious at the foot of the bar) hollers. "They killed Fritz! The bastards!" he yells, although he makes no overt moves. Other patrons have cleared out, protecting their drinks and their hides.

Windham moves toward Jacob, finding the professor in his path. He hops onto the long bench and back down, circumventing Ringgenberg and landing just next to the drifter who started this uproar. The slight young feller also connects with a punch to Walker's mid-section.

--------------------------

OOC: The Judge narrated the action because the Extras in the bar would act between Earnest and Tracy's turn. The Judge will need to adjudicate the results of their damage rolls, but I went ahead and drew (with the help of my lovely spouse as I'm not where the initiative deck is), the next round of initiative in order to keep things moving.

Initiative R2
Alphonse:  Three spades, last
Dave:  Nine spades, third
Earnest:  Eight spades, fourth
Jacob:  Ten hearts, first
Tracy:  Six clubs, fifth
Bartender and other Extras:  Ten diamonds, second

Jake will have the initiative,  as soon as we finalize the damage and affects against Walker at the end of the current round.

Mr Richardsen reminded the Judge that the Ganging Up bonus increases with each additional opponent. He is correc.

This is a tricky rule, IMO. I don't think it would apply to Jacob's initial attack, because when he was attacking there was no one else engaged.

Then the professor joined, giving +1. Then Tracy . . . .

My inclination is to say that ENS got +1 and Tracy got +2.

Next round, assuming all intend to continue the attack and nothing changes to prevent them, all three men would get a +2.

OOC:
13:19, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 4 using 1d4+2, rerolling max with rolls of 2.  Damage roll against Dave.

I'll be awaiting my turn in combat.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 167):

Earnest's damage roll:
12:35, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 2 using 1d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2.  Punch Damage.

OOC: Does the 'Gang Up' bonus apply to damage as well (I'm away from my rulebook right now)? Also, WRT the bennie, since the first roll succeeded Earnest would still get the benny back even though the benny roll was worse, right?

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 170):

OOC:
No, the Ganging Up is only a bonus to the Fighting test, not to damage.

Yes, because the intitial roll is good enough for a hit, the benny re-roll isn't needed and therefore the benny is not spent (it is retained).

---------------------

The punches landed by ENS and Tracy have no effect on the vagabond known as Dave Walker.

Please move to the next round. Jacob's initiative.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 171):

The force of the rough-looking stranger's punch snapped Jake's head back, and the Texan shook his head to try and clear out the fog. A moment later Richardsen saw both Earnest and Mister Windham throwing punches at the polecat who had attacked him without warning.

Jacob was tempted to taunt the man once again, but quickly thought better of it. ~Last time I was jawin' when I shoulda been stickin' to just hittin' . . . lesson learned.~

So he aimed another punch at the man, but could tell that it did not land all that solidly.

---

OOC:

Free Action: 21:53, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 2,5 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,5.  Spirit Check (To Unshake).

Notes: Although a success on the Spirit Check will unshake Jacob, as I read the rules, without a raise on the test he still will be able to only perform Free Actions. Accordingly, Jacob will expend a benny to fully unshake and allow him to act normally. He now has two of three bennies remaining.

Action: 21:59, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 4,6 using d6,d6+2, rerolling max with rolls of 4,4.  Fighting v. Walker (+2 Ganging Up Bonus).

22:03, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 2 using 1d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2.  Damage (Strength).

Notes: I believe that a 6 (due to the ganging-up bonus) is a hit against Dave's Parry of 6, but for minimal damage (2).

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 172):

OOC: Jacob's reading of the rules is accurate -- but that requirement for a raise when "unshaking" in order to perform combat actions was changed in an official update in 2015. I believe you can download the one-page errata pdf from the Pinnacle website (I think that's where I got it). I'm glad this came up in the playtest.

Therefore, Jacob doesn't need to spend the benny to execute the unarmed attack. The benny is retained.

Jake's assessment of the combat is correct -- the 6 is a hit (no raise) and the damage of 2 has no effect against Walker's Toughness.

However, one minor point -- the attack roll should have been d6+2, d6+2 and then the roll result would have been 6,6 with the rolls of 4,4. In other words, the +2 for Ganging Up applies to both the Fighting Skill die and the Wild die. Noting this for clarity and future rolls.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 173):

The bartender puts his back to the wall behind the bar. He watches and waits.

OOC: It is Dave's turn.

"Well looky here - even your friends don't think you can finish this on your own"

OOC: Walker takes another swing at the Texan:

07:26, Today: Dave Walker rolled 7,2 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 7,2.  2nd attack on the Texan - play test.

... so the 7 hits but does not raise, damage roll:

07:27, Today: Dave Walker rolled 1,4 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 1,4.  2nd hit on Texan, damage roll.

Walker was having so much insulting the Texan that he didn't even put a lot of muscle or effort behind his punch, barely striking the man... you know,  like when you are play fighting with a kid...

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 175):

The bearded feller that ambushed Jacob at the bar now throws a half-hearted punch. The drifter connects but Jacob is a tough hombre, even without his Winchester at hand.

OOC: Earnest's turn. Because this is a playtest, the Judge is reminding those Ganging Up that they will get +2 to hit if they continue that tactic.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 176):

Cursing his first punch under his breath, Earnest throws another, drawing from his college fighting days.

14:37, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 3,15 using d6+2,d6+2, rerolling max with rolls of 1,(6+6+1)13.  2nd punch at Jacob's opponent.

14:42, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 8 using 2d6, rerolling max with rolls of 3,5.  2nd punch damage.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 177):

Although he isn't of the same ilk as the famed Professor Mike Donovan, Ringgenberg lands a punch against Dave Walker. The drifter finds himself shaken by the punch.

OOC: Dave Walker is now in Shaken status after the professor's attack. It is now Tracy's turn.

Dave may choose to spend a benny to unshake, at any time, or he may choose to wait for his next combat turn (next round, after initiative) to use the free Vigor test to remove the shaken status.

Ideally, if Dave choose the former, that decision should be made BEFORE Tracy attacks. As we are play-testing this combat, the Judge is inclined to allow the benny at any time to reduce any lag time in the combat sequence. We'll see how that goes and use our experience here as a basis for ground rules in the ongoing game.

OOC: Walker is spending his 2nd benny during this encounter to unshake.

<i>~ Come on Darla, 's that all you got? ~</i>

"You're gonna have to try that one again kid"

Seeing the larger man stunned by Earnest's punch for a split second, Tracy thinks that this may be his moment.

He launches another right at the instigator, hoping that the support of his compatriots increases his luck.

OOC:

15:02, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 2,3 using d4,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,3.  2nd punch damage, at Dave.

15:00, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 8,7 using d4+2,d6+2, rerolling max with rolls of (4+2)6,5.  2nd punch at Dave.

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 180):

Windham connects with another punch as the three men gang up on the drifter who started the fisticuffs. Unfortunately he can't muster enough force to affect the man named Walker, who continues to laugh off the punches. Evidently, he's a tough hombre.

Meanwhile, Poirier has continued to back away, carrying his mug of beer and congregating with the other patrons away from the action.

---------------------

OOC: Interesting playtesting results. I hope it is providing insight to all participants. Happy to continue if desired, or end whenever the players want to end.

Initiative R3
Alphonse:  Joker, first (or at will)
Dave:  Two spades, last
Earnest:  Three clubs, fifth
Jacob:  Seven diamonds, fourth
Tracy:  Seven spades, third
Bartender and other Extras:  Ace spades, second

(Tie breaker is reverse alphabetical suit order)

--------------------

The silk magnate watches with the other patrons, considering whether he should do anything and deciding to wait for his time. The bartender holds his position, ready to fire the scattergun, if necessary.

--------------------

It is Tracy's turn.

OOC: I'm game for one more round... let's see if anyone can put Walker in his place...

Now, Tracy was frustrated. Sure, he was small, but this man didn't even seem to notice that he was connecting with his punches. He decided that he'd had enough.

Hoping for the support of his fellow fighters, the Investigator threw caution to the wind and attacked the combatant with all the might he could muster, throwing a wild punch straight at him.

OOC:
I'm going for a Wild Attack here. I wanted to try out a special combat technique.

11:19, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 5,6 using d4+4,d6+4, rerolling max with rolls of 1,2.  Wild Attack on Dave.

11:22, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 3,4 using d4+2,d6+2 with rolls of 1,2.  Damage against Dave (from Wild Attack).
11:23, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 5,3 using d4+2,d6+2 with rolls of 3,1.  Reroll damage against Dave (from Wild Attack).

I used a benny to reroll my damage. Bold roll is the roll that I kept (as the damage was higher).

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 183):

OOC:

Interesting tactical choice (the "Wild Attack"), Tracy. I'm sure that I read about it when I skimmed through the entirety of the SW rulebook some months back, but I had long since forgotten all about it -- possibly because I glossed over the melee-related rules, intending for Jake (IC) to avoid such annoyances. :)

OOC: The Judge applauds the use of the Wild Attack. I was hoping that people would try some actions other than the stale "I attack" because the SW rules are built for more (the Judge tried some other actions with CDM in the fight against Jake). Perhaps others may try a different kind of action in this round, for the sake of playtesting scope, if nothing else.

It looks like Tracy did the attack correctly, but not the damage. A punch (unarmed attack) is only the Str die roll. The Wild DIe is for Trait Tests only -- damage is not a Trait test. Previously, Tracy had achieved a Raise on one of his hits, which meant +1d6 to the damage roll, but this particular attack didn't get a Raise, so it is only the d4+2 for damage -- unless I'm missing something. (Tracy did the same thing last round as well, rolling a d6 when it wasn't appropriate, it just didn't matter because of the math). If Tracy were using a weapon such as a knife or a club, he would have got his Str die + the weapon die.

Therefore, the punch hits with the '6' against Walker's Parry of 6 and the best damage is the result of '5' which succeeds against Walker's Toughness of 5, causing a Shaken result.

-----------------------

Although small in stature, Tracy Windham shows  an abundance of spirit. Throwing caution the wind, he throws a haymaker at the drifter, connecting solidly yet again -- and this time he sees and feels Walker's reaction to the blow, indicating the attack has shaken the man, at least for the moment.

------------------------

OOC: Once again, Walker has a choice:

Spend a benny to unshake before someone else hits him.
Wait for his turn and make the free SPIRIT test to unshake before he acts.

It is now Jacob's turn. At his discretion, the Texan may take his turn before Dave states his choice as to his attempts to unshake, or Jake may wait to learn Dave's choice before stating actions and making his trait test rolls.

EDIT: I have typed 'Vigor' instead of 'Spirit' a couple of times when talking about the free trait test to unshake at the beginning of a character's turn. Edited above for accuracy in the record.
This message was last edited by the GM at 11:30, Wed 14 Nov 2018.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 185):

OOC: Well, if Richardsen has the opportunity to go after Dave before he can unshake, that seems like the smart thing to do. Will work up an IC post for Jake in a bit.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 185):

OOC:
My apologies on the incorrect damage roll, Judge. I'll have that correct in the future. I'm glad that I still would have rolled d4+2 for Str. at least, so that I didn't interrupt the flow of the combat.

Thanks, Jacob! I thought that it could fit Tracy's current combat situation pretty well, due to his Ganging Up bonus. I hope to have my details correct on the rolls for next time, though.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 185):

It was a little annoying to the Texan that little Mister Windham -- and even the Perfesser (who woulda thunk it?) -- were turning out to be more effective in fighting the mangy rascal who had rabbit-punched him than Jacob himself was.

Granted, Jake had always looked down on men who were ready to start swinging at the drop of a hat -- why risk bustin' your knuckles on some lout's head when you needed your fingers to be in good workin' order for shootin'? But it still rankled somewhat.

In any event, Richardsen decided to try something different -- taking advantage of the fact that Mister Windham had just landed a punch, he picked up a shot-glass that still had some whiskey in it and splashed the alcoholic liquor at his opponent's face, hoping to distract the fellow -- and maybe even blind him for a few seconds.

---

OOC:

15:12, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 11,5 using d10+2,d6+2, rerolling max with rolls of 9,3.  Agility Roll.

15:13, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 21,5 using d10+2,d6+2, rerolling max with rolls of (10+9)19,3.  Bennie Re-Roll, Agility.

Notes: Inspired by Tracy's "trying something different", Jake is trying a "Trick" instead of a customary punch (p. 86 of my version of the rule-book). This looks to me like it will be an opposed Agility Test with Dave (presumably to see whether or not he can move his head so as to avoid the Texan's "whiskey attack") -- but I'll defer to the Judge's adjudication, of course).

Edit: Fixed a misspelling.

Edit #2: As marked by color.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:43, Tue 13 Nov 2018.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 188):

OOC: Nice action, Jake -- and an Ace for your efforts. The Judge will still give Dave the option to spend a benny to unshake before Jacob's attack (again, playtesting here). We need to wait for Walker anyway, as he will need to make the opposed Agility test.

Dave: state whether you use a benny to unshake and the make your Agility test.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 189):

OOC: Yep, I'll burn off benny #3 to un-shake. Here is my agility roll:

19:11, Today: Dave Walker rolled 9,1 using d10,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 9,1.  Opposed agility test.

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 190):

OOC: The Judge needed to mull this over -- here's the adjudication:

Allowing Walker's use of the benny to unshake before Jacob attacks. At the gaming table, he certainly would have interjected. And because he responded soon after the Judge, seems quite reasonable in this game. The Judge is willing to wait for characters to follow-up when needed, as long as players are logging in regularly and participating in a reliable fashion. Clearly true for Dave Walker so far.

Richardsen's action, playing a Trick, is plausible in the current situation, therefore allowed (and encouraged). There is a glass with some whiskey in it on the bar . . . Agility makes sense (grabbing the glass during the melee and aiming its contents accurately).

Jacob got the ace and that spells trouble for Dave, who had a good roll but no ace to compete with the Texan. It is a hit (success) and a raise. For the Trick action, a success means the opponent suffers a -2 to Parry until his next action. A raise means the opponent is Shaken. So once again, Dave remains Shaken and has used 3 bennies.

If Dave had won the opposed test, the Judge might have ruled that the whiskey just missed -- or there wasn't enough left in the glass to matter. Or, if Dave had won by a large margin, the Judge might have ruled that the glass slipped from Jake's hand and he ended up throwing it over the opponent's shoulder, sailing it across the room where it shattered into the long table top.

-----------------------------------------------

Dave Walker had teased his opponents roughly a dozen seconds ago, having taken the best of their punches and ganging-up on him. Now, he finds himself reeling from the combined attacks these three men, who have found just enough space to flank him between the bar and the long table. Walker had shaken off the little man's hook punch -- the one that landed too close to his lower rib -- but the splash in the face took him off-guard only a moment or two later.

-----------------------------------------------

OOC: It is Earnest's turn. Again, Dave is shaken. By the Judge's count, the drifter has one benny remaining. Walker may use it before Earnest's action to unshake, or wait for his Spirit test (the Judge cites the correct attribute this time, see edit to msg #185) on his next action (which is after the professor).

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 191):

Earnest, getting into his stride, throws another punch at the instigator.

12:44, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 5,3 using d6+2,d6+2, rerolling max with rolls of 3,1.  Punch at Dave.

12:45, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 2 using 1d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2.  Punch damage.

OOC: Not a great hit roll, but with Dave's -2 on Parry I'm guessing it 's a hit... anemic damage roll though...

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 192):

OOC: Because this is a playtest: we are playing with the Blood and Guts Setting Rule as per the Savaged Goin forum msg # 7. Earnest could re-roll the damage by spending a benny.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 191):

OOC:  Hmm ok , I know I don't want to use my last benny on this, but I am a bit confused re: the Vigor vs Spirt test and if you want me to roll it again. Just in case, here it is:

15:33, Today: Dave Walker rolled 3,5 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 3,5.  Spirit check .

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 194):

OOC: Nope, I wasn't asking for a roll, yet, although I'm happy to apply this roll when a Spirit check would apply. My note about Vigor vs. Spirit was in regard to the correction I made on my own previous error, where I wrote that the free test to unshake at the beginning of a character's turn is done using Vigor, when it is actually a Spirit test.  So far, Dave hasn't ever done that free Spirit test -- he has used a benny every time to unshake before the next attack occurred. So I wasn't asking for a re-roll, I was attempting to clarify the game flow rules (again, correcting my own mistatement from earlier).

The question at hand is:

Does Walker want to spend his 4th and last benny to unshake BEFORE the professor's attack? Or save that last benny and risk getting wounded by the professors attack because Dave is already shaken when the professor hits and (maybe) does damage? FYI, a character that is already shaken and then suffers another shaken result by a physical attack automatically suffers a wound.

It sounds like the answer is "No, Dave wants to save his last benny and will take the risk," which means that after Earnest's damage is fully adjudicated (he could still re-roll it by spending a benny), that Walker would use the Spirit roll as his free attempt to unshake at the beginning of his turn.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 193):

He hasn't used any yet, so yes, a benny for a reroll on damage.

20:28, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 4 using 1d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4.  Punch damage reroll.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 196):

OOC: As this is only a playtest, the Judge will assume Walker held onto his last benny and dodged any further damage.

He makes his Spirit roll to unshake, which means he is fully able to act this round.

It is Dave's turn, last in the round.

Sounded like it might be the last round, but the Judge is game for more playtesting here if the players are. Because Poirier drew the Joker last round, the initiative deck would be reshuffled and new cards deal for r4 if the PCs want to continue.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 197):

A solid hit, I wasn't expecting that from Samuel.

~ Just like the last time, Samuel always needs help ~

He takes a good look at the Texan and realizes... it's not Samuel!

"You're not Samuel... whoah hold on partner, I mistook you for someone else!"

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 198):

The other man's admitting to a case of mistaken identity did not seem to cool the Texan's ire.

"A back-shooter like you put Hickok in the ground. If'n this Samuel feller has got a lick of sense, he won't be turnin' his back on you."

"Reckon I won't, neither -- not no more."

---

OOC: Added the final sentence.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:30, Thu 15 Nov 2018.

OOC: As you can see from my post, I am OK with stopping this test combat now. Thanks to everyone for testing the Wild and Tricks attack types, I'll be reading over that section more deeply, as well as the various implications of being Shaken and how to un-shake.

In reply to Dave Walker (msg # 200):

OOC: I'm fine with either stopping the Play-Test or continuing, depending upon the consensus.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 201):

OOC:
I’m also okay with ending the playtest.

OOC: Looks like we are done with this playtest. We can do more anytime anyone wants to experiment.

OOC: NEW PLAYTEST for SWADE character updates.
The Judge is starting this incident, but any PC who wants to test out something about their re-design in a solitary encounter should feel free to initiate with a post. We will do as many incidents as are helpful to test things out.

-----------------------------------
A Call in the Night

The three pards had returned to their room at Larsen's boarding house and settled in for the night. As the weather had turned a mite chilly, the men were grateful for the heavy wool blankets provided by Mrs. Larsen.

Sometime deep in their slumber, a hard rapping  on the other side of their bedroom door.

"Professor Ringberg," calls out a woman's voice, mispronouncing Earnest's surname in her haste. "Professor," she repeats two more times, while knocking.

OOC: Each of the PCs that wants to participate in this playtest should make a Notice roll in this surprise situation. Success (TN4) means you get to act in the first round. Failure means you don't get to act in the first round.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 204):

Some men tended to be a mite wooly-headed and foggy-minded when awakened from a sound sleep, but Jake was not one of them -- although he had noted that drinking too much John Barleycorn before going to sleep oft-times affected his ability to be clear-headed and alert if suddenly awakened.

In this instance, the Texican was reaching for the LeMat that old Shumway had repaired before the second call for the Perfesser sounded through the door to the room that was shared by the threesome.

---

OOC: It occurred to me that a playtest might provide a good opportunity for both the Judge and me to fine-tune the somewhat unusual properties of the LeMat that Jake will most likely be carrying during the next chapter of our adventure. If the Judge disagrees and rules that Shumway has not yet turned over the refurbished LeMat, I shall cheerfully edit. :)

13:47, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 4,3 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4,3.  Notice Check re: Wake-up Call.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 205):

OOC: Playtesting intent is to explore whatever needs to be explored and tested, so including the LeMat in this exercise is all according to Hoyle.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 204):

Tracy started awake at the sharp rap at the door. A practiced hand at keeping his wits about himself, the investigator was always quick awaken and become alert.

OOC:

23:39, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 4,7 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4,(6+1)7.  Notice, knock at door.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 204):

Earnest wakes up quickly at the first knock. He sees that his two partners are likewise alert. He gets out of bed, approaches the door, and opens it a crack before speaking.

Yes, can I help you?

17:22, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 8,2 using d8+2,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 6,2.  Notice, knock at door.

OOC: As this is playtesting and especially because our new player, Tommy, is learning the ropes ... Earnest's roll should have been d8+2, d6+2. Any modifiers to a trait roll apply to the final total -- so the professor's +2 is added to whichever die (the Trait die or the Wild die) is higher. As the TN (Target Number) is 4 for most Trait rolls, Earnest's 8 (6+2) is a raise, being 4 higher than the TN. In a situation where the raise makes a difference (that is, a raise gives you a better result than a regular success at the TN), the Judge will make that clear, sometimes before the roll, sometimes after.

Jake and Tracy both succeeded on the roll, so all three of the PCs awaken and are ready to act when the knocking/calling begins. If this were the start of a combat or other situation involving initiative the Judge would draw action cards for the PCs, who would get to act draw order, as usual in a combat round. For now, I'll skip the draw and continue RP, which will lead to more playtest rolling and an action card draw, soon.

BTW, Tommy is free to join as well. For the moment, let's say Tommy is in a different room at the Larsen's boarding house. He should also make a Notice roll and if he succeeds (TN 4), he would also draw an action card in the round.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 208):

Mrs. Larsen speaks with urgency, her voice an octave higher than usual.

"Do ye speak Chinese?" she asks hurriedly. "Yer the only one we could think of ..."

After the professor responds in the affirmative, telling her that he speaks Mandarin but not Cantonese, she turns and runs.

"That'll have t'do," she says, "get a wiggle on!"

--------------------

OOC: The Judge is taking liberties, here, to advance to trait rolling for playtesting fun.

--------------------

The heroes dress hurriedly and follow down the stairs to find the boarding house's front door open and a few people, including Mr. and Mrs. Larsen, hovering over what appears to be an injured man on the front porch. He is muttering in a foreign tongue.

OOC: Earnest can make his Language trait roll to comprehend. The other PCs, if for any reason they would have ever heard the Mandarin language before (they would have), can make an unskilled roll at d4-2, d6-2 to have a chance to comprehend some part of the man's speech.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 210):

Earnest listens to the man's muttering carefully.

16:21, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 2,2 using d4,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,2.  Language check - Mandarin.
16:22, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 1,1 using d4,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 1,1.  Language Check - Benny Reroll.

OOC: I guess we get to see the affect of a critical failure! The dice roller was kind of being weird for me...

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 209):

23:13, Today: Thomas Pearce rolled 1,8 using d4,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 1,(6+2)8.  Notice roll - knock at door - msg 209 chpt 20.

Tommy hears some kind of disturbance in the next room and then several people running down the stairs. He quickly follows

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 210):

Tracy listens to the injured man’s speech, but understands none of it. While he heard a bit of Mandarin back in California, he really didn’t pick much of it. Anything he might have picked up certainly did not benefit him now.

OOC:


23:52, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 1,-1 using d4-2,d6-2, rerolling max with rolls of 3,1.  Language check: Mandarin.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 211):

OOC: Yes, we do ... exploring here ... the Judge can think of several possibilities that apply to this circumstance:

1. It's no wonder the professor can't understand ... turns out the man is speaking Cantonese after all. Waste of time.
   
2. Earnest blushes, a mite embarrassed, as it sounds like the man is making a salacious proposition. Oh my.
   
3. The professor has no idea what the man is saying. Clearly the man speaks Mandarin but Ringgenberg's conversational skills are rusty since those days in back in San Francisco. The men will have to find some other way to communicate.
   
4. The professor attempts to reply, asking the man to slow down so he could understand better, but the easterner ends up biting his own tongue when trying to curl it in order to pronounce the /sh/ sound correctly. How embarrassing.

For now, the Judge chooses #3. Maybe someone else will get lucky on the unskilled roll. Jacob and Thomas may still make rolls for that.
This message was last edited by the GM at 15:12, Fri 31 Jan 2020.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 210):

Jacob turned his head so that his good ear was towards the man who appeared to a Celestial, wondering if he would recognize any of the words or phrases that he had picked up whilst he and Earnest had been in 'Frisco. After a moment he frowned and shook his head as he straightened up and glanced at Earnest and Mister Windham.

---

OOC: 11:58, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 0,2 using d4-2,d6-2, rerolling max with rolls of 2,4.  Unskilled Check re: Understanding Injured Man.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 215):

Arriving a minute or two after the other men, Tommy sees them leaning over the injured man and immediately realizes from their expressions and head shaking that they cannot understand him...Tommy squeezes closer and also listens as the man seemingly repeats the same phrase again and again..but he too cannot make head or tails of it.


00:24, Today: Thomas Pearce rolled 0,3 using d4-2,d6-2, rerolling max with rolls of 2,5.  Unskilled Check: Understanding Injured Man.
This message was last edited by the player at 05:34, Sat 01 Feb 2020.

No one can understand the Chinaman. The professor recognizes the language, it is definitely Mandarin, but the provincial dialect eludes him. That, or the man's injury is hindering his ability to converse  -- perhaps it is the man himself who is making no sense. To Rinngenberg, it seems the man is expressing some sort of concern about a wandering red apple.

Clearly, the heroes and the townsfolk will need to find some other way to communicate with the fallen Chinaman. For now, the professor may attempt to treat the man's wounds, as it seems no one else has done so.

-------------------

OOC: For Tommy's benefit, any of the men could have succeeded at this check, even with the -2 for unskilled. An ace on the Wild die would have been a success; an Ace on the d4 would probably be a success (75% to roll 2 or more and the first Ace roll and thus reach the TN: 4+2 - 2 = 4). It might have been worth spending a benny here, even for unskilled. Of course, that's what Earnest did, and look where it got him ...

In general, the Judge is more apt to award a benny during the game to people who are using bennies. If this had been an important juncture in the game, it would have been wise for others to try a benny re-roll. For this playtest, we will move on.

Everyone make a Notice check; except for ENS if he is in fact treating the injured Chinaman.
This message was last edited by the GM at 14:23, Sat 01 Feb 2020.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 217):

Jake straightened up from his stooped-over stance, since bending down had not helped him understand the Celestial. He glanced around the porch and the immediate vicinity, curious as to whether he could find any clues that would help explain anything about the injured man or how he had come to be lying on Missus Larsen's front porch . . .

---

OOC: 13:02, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 2,4 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,4.  Notice Check.

Edit: Added missing word.
This message was last edited by the player at 19:01, Sat 01 Feb 2020.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 218):

Earnest, embarrassed at his lack of understanding the man, starts to look his injuries over.

Apologies, I am having great difficulty understanding him... does a "wandering red apple" mean anything to anyone? Mrs. Larsen, do you have any bandages or clean cloth handy? And some clean water too please.

He then sets to work treating the man's wounds, regretting the last whiskey he indulged in the evening before.

11:30, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 3,2 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 3,2.  Healing injured man.
11:33, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 2,3 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,3.  Healing, Benny re-roll.


OOC: Perhaps Earnest drank to much earlier, he's beyond useless right now!

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 217):

Frustrated he cannot understand the injured man nor assist with aiding him Tommy steps back and looks around taking in the scene

23:12, Today: Thomas Pearce rolled 5,5 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 5,5.  Notice roll - msg 217 chpt 20.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OOC: For this chapter 20 play are we assuming Tommy already knows the other player characters and is now traveling with them, etc or are they strangers?

Also FYI I messed up description in dice roller for this Notice roll. It was not for knock at door(previous roll) so I removed that from the above note
This message was last edited by the player at 04:31, Sun 02 Feb 2020.

In reply to Thomas Pearce (msg # 220):

OOC: Whatever you want -- take the lead on that and just decide whether he met them earlier that night or never met them.

No worries about the dice roller description, we all do stuff like that. Your note to alert the Judge is perfect.

Waiting for Tracy's Notice roll.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 221):

Tracy stands up from his crouch and surveys the scene. Perhaps something in his line of sight could answer what happened to the man as well as his words could.

OOC:

10:36, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 5,4 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 5,4.  Notice, vicinity of injured man.

OOC: Perhaps the Chinaman was on the trail of "the wise man's treasure-trove" (i.e., Earnest's steamer trunk and all the treasures that it contains), which seemingly would also have entered Miz Larsen's boarding-house by way of the front porch.

Or, it could be that the Celestial has heard of the "Treasures of the Ancient Knights (K-niggits)" which are supposedly somewhere in the area.

Unfortunately for him, it seems that others are also on the trail of the selfsame treasure-trove, and they have not been playing nice.

Or, maybe not . . . :)

Earnests attempts to treat the injured Chinamen, without success. Nothing seems to be going right for the professor, at this time of the night. When he had asked for clean water and bandages, Mrs. Larsen had fetched them, but the supplies didn't help Ringgenberg at all.

No one in attendance volunteers anything about a "wandering red apple." One of the bystanders -- with whom the heroes were unacquainted -- makes a snide remark, something to the effect of "Sounds like he's just making it up."

Meanwhile, Jacob, Tracy and Tommy all look around, hoping to discover a clue to the Chinaman's dilemma. In fact, all three of the men spy a lone horse near the road to the south -- saddled, free and unattended. Too far away in the moonlight or lamplight to recognize the steed.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 224):

Earnest sits back, shakes his head and sighs.

I apologize Mrs. Larsen, I am a bit out of sorts tonight it seems... you should call for the town's doctor.

He notices the others looking in the same general direction.

Gentlemen, have you spotted something?

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 225):

Tommy sees a horse standing not far down the road. He turns to see the others have also noticed. He half whispers to them so as not to alert the rest of the crowd

Might that be his horse on the loose over there? Let's go bring him back before he runs off

In reply to Thomas Pearce (msg # 226):

"I'll go with you, Mister Pearce," the Texan offered.

"Too bad we don't have none of that red apple the Celestial was just now mutterin' to the Perfesser about. Be right easy for us to maeke friends with that kid iffin' we did."

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 227):

“I’ll go, too.”

The investigator figured that his investigative skills could come in handy when the group attempted to ascertain the horse’s relevance to the injured man’s plight.

As the heroes move closer to the horse, Jacob and Tracy now recognize it.

It is Poogoo, the Paiute's horse. Its rider is nowhere to be seen.

OOC: Make another notice roll. Earnest may roll also, if he chooses to follow the other three men.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the GM at 13:30, Wed 05 Feb 2020.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 229):

Tracy scanned the area, looking for any idea why Poogoo was present.

OOC:

09:30, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 4,5 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4,5.  Notice, near Poogoo.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 229):

"Hunh," Jacob grunted as soon as they neared the horse. Turning to Mister Pearce, he explained "This horse belongs to Red Shirt, an Indian who lives hereabouts."

"He's a guide an' tracker, an' he is good at his job. Not so long ago he guided Mister Windham an' me an' the Perfesser an' a couple of others when we went out lookin' for a young woman who had gone missin'."

Noticing that Mister Windham was already looking around the area, Jake took the reins of the horse and scratched behind the kid's ear. "Too bad you cain't tell us what's goin' on'," he remarked to Poogoo.

Then an idea popped into Jake's head. "I wonder iffin' that Celestial was speakin' of Red Shirt instead of a red apple?" he said, speaking to no one in particular.

The Texican joined Mister Windham in glancing around to see if he could spot anything that helped explain the mystery that they were faced with . . .

---

OOC: 12:01, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 1,5 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 1,5.  Notice Check: Poogoo.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 231):

Earnest also joins the trio, wiping his hands as he rises.

We'll be right back Mrs. Larsen.

Once there, Earnest decides to look over the horse and his saddle to see if there are any clues that could help. Upon hearing Jake's theory, he chimes in.

Very astute Jake! I hope nothing has befallen Red Shirt...

17:23, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 4,1 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4,1.  Notice: Clues on or about Poogoo.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 232):

Tracy nods approvingly. “Very clever, Jake.”

While the others checked around for other clues, the investigator got to work reading the tracks to and from Poogoo’s position. While the Californian was nowhere near the accomplished tracker that Red Shirt was, he felt like he picked up on something in the dirt near the horse.

OOC:

05:06, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 7,2 using d4,d4, rerolling max with rolls of (4+3)7,2.  Survival, Poogoo’s tracks.
This message was last edited by the player at 10:12, Thu 06 Feb 2020.

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 233):

OOC: Not sure why Tracy rolled d4 twice -- second roll should have been a d6 for the Wild Die. Anyhow, it was the first d4 that Aced, so that will stand.

Waiting for Tommy's second Notice roll, per msg #229.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 234):

Tommy gives the horse a good once over and then scans the ground hoping something catches his eye.

22:23, Today: Thomas Pearce rolled 3,5 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 3,5.  Notice Roll - Poogoo tracks - bennie roll.

22:22, Today: Thomas Pearce rolled 2,3 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 2,3.  Notice Roll - Poogoo tracks.

The men look around and listen in the dark of night, near the road that leads west towards the Four O'Clock ranch and east towards the other towns of Nouveau Zion. Jake notices that Red Shirt's scabbard was empty of its carbine. Tommy and Earnest hear what sounds like movement in the distance. Everyone can see signs of movement in the area, but this close to the road, it stands to reason that foot and hoof traffic would be commonplace here.

Meanwhile, Tracy inspects the area to the south of the road, finding what appear to be several sets of fresh tracks heading south, towards the border. Initially, the signs confused the investigator, as the footprints seemed to lead in circles, but his persistence pays off as he concludes that there was some sort of scuffle here, with further signs that a group of people headed south in the aftermath. Believing he can pick up the sign again, the Californian rejoins the group.

OOC: As always, in this game we play "anything posted publicly is public knowledge." Tracy doesn't have to tell everyone what he found, in character; rather, it's assumed to be known now amongst the group (and vice versa for other findings). Of course, PCs may choose to post dialogue and narrative to advance the plot or just have fun with RP -- the point is that it isn't required in terms of common knowledge amongst the group.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 236):

"Din't hear no shootin'," Jake observed, perhaps restating the obvious after discovering that the saddle-scabbard was empty of Red Shirt's longarm.

"Good job spottin' that sign," he said to the Californian, "'specially in the dark."

After a short pause, during which the Texican thoughtfully stroked his chin-whiskers, Jacob added " Seems to me lieke we oughtta follow them tracks that Mister Windham found, leastwaeys 'til we see iffin' that looks to be a liekely die-reckshunn for our in-ves-ti-gaeshunn."

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 237):

Swear to St Christoper I heard something movin away from us over that way, they may not be too far off and from what Tracy says there might even be two groups. I'm all for fullowin em but we're not gettin too far like this.


Tommy points his hands toward himself.

We'll need to be properly kitted out before we get on after them and we'll needsum orses f'sure 
This message was last edited by the player at 20:46, Sat 08 Feb 2020.

In reply to Thomas Pearce (msg # 238):

The investigator’s first instinct was to brashly follow the tracks and see what he found. However, Mister Pearce made a good point. A moment later, Tracy nods.

“Let’s get a move on, then. Seems like we might be short on time here.”

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 239):

Well, we can at least follow these tracks for a short way to see if someone is nearby... We may not need horses just yet.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 240):

OOC: In an actual game play (not play-test), the Judge would ask for clarification / agreement amongst the group as to what they are doing -- e.g., going back to gear up, assembling horses, etc. For testing purposes, skipping that in order to test out some more crunch with SWADE designs.

---------------------

After a brief discussion, the four had men rushed back to the Larsen's boarding house to equip themselves properly, while sending word to the stables to ready their horses, iffin' they might be needed.

As they approached Poogoo just a few minutes later, finding the gelding lingering and grazing where they had left hm, they agreed  that Pearce could use the Paiute's mount should there be cause to do so.

Now, with Windham taking the lead, the four heroes begin to follow the sign that the investigator had discovered.

---------------------

OOC: The PCs should narrate briefly their marching order, preparation, etc. Tracy should make another Survival roll for Tracking.

EDITS: Fixed typos and such to clarify
This message was last edited by the GM at 00:40, Mon 10 Feb 2020.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 241):

Back at their room at Larsen’s, Tracy gathers his haversack, slinging it over his shoulder. He also grabs his Spencer, doing the same with it. He rushes back out to the tracks, gathering his place before the other heroes return.

OOC:

Tracy will take point, following the tracks.

09:39, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 1,1 using d4,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 1,1.  Survival, following tracks.

Or maybe he won’t... That’s an automatic critical failure, no Benny reroll, correct?
This message was last edited by the player at 14:41, Mon 10 Feb 2020.

In reply to Tracy Windham (msg # 242):

OOC: Yes it is a critical failure, no benny re-roll allowed, by the book. Some good opportunities for play-testing here ...

First, the Judge will remind players that the higher die type the character has for the Trait roll, the lower the chances are of a critical failure could happen. In this case, Tracking is now part of Survival, which means a change for Tracy's character. So far, the player's thinking seems to be substitute the Tracking d4 for Survival d4, but if Tracy expects to use Survival during game-play, having it at d6 gives him a better chance to avoid a critical failure (bearing in mind that Survival now has a wider usage). Worth considering as the update to SWADE design continues. Obviously, all players can apply this thinking to various skill building.

As for the now of this roll, since Tracy took the lead and no one else has posted any narrative, the Judge is going to move forward.

---------------------

With the investigator leading the way and the professor close by, providing lamp light for the travel into unknown terrain, the four men follow the tracks that Windham had found earlier. Jacob follows a few steps behind Tracy and Earnest, with Tommy bringing up the rear another few paces behind.

After several minutes, the men find themselves following along the edge of a ravine, which suddenly opens onto a small mesa with a hillock rising just above them. There are four men on the hillock -- they have the higher ground and are mobilizing, apparently at the sight of the professor's lantern approaching their campsite.

---------------------

OOC: Here's how the Judge is adjudicating the snake eyes roll for Survival as part of this play-test.

The Critical Failure results in Tracy following the tracks as he had hoped, but totally misjudging where they were leading and when they might need to stop to assess their next steps. The men stumble into this campground, becoming surprised by their sudden predicament as the bodies (a western term, still used today in some regions, not referring to a corpse but to a human being in a generic sense) on the hillock saw the approaching lamp light and have the advantage at the beginning of the encounter.

Each of the PCs must succeed at a Notice roll (TN4) in order to draw an action card for the surprise round initiative. Success means you do get a card and will be able to act this round based on the draw, failure means you cannot act this round. (This is the same kind of roll we made when Mrs. Larsen awoke the PCs.) Might be a good time to use a benny if you fail the roll -- although, if you roll the dreaded snake eyes, no benny re-roll is allowed. The Judge will draw action cards after everyone has made the roll -- and completed any benny re-rolls if applicable.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 243):

Jacob wasn't all that useful when it came to tracking sign, even in full daylight, so he was well content to follow Mister Windham's lead in the dark of the night. He took care to keep his eyes averted from the direct glare of the lantern that Earnest was carrying, so as not to lose his night-vision -- just as he had learned not to stare at the campfire when on guard duty at night.

The group came upon the campsite rather unexpectedly, and the Texan nearly bumped into Mister Windham and the Perfesser, who were ahead of him in the line of march . . .

---

OOC: 15:14, Today: Jacob Richardsen rolled 6,2 using d8,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 6,2.  Notice Check re: Stumblin' on(to) the Campsite.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 243):

When they get to the room, Earnest grabs his lantern from the trunk and then dons his shoulder holster and Colt, grabbing some spare bullets (12). He puts on his coat then joins the others on the search.

When they come upon the campsite, he sees the mens' sudden movement.

17:07, Today: Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg rolled 8,7 using d8+2,d6+2, rerolling max with rolls of 6,5.  Notice for action card.

OOC: I do not know if it will help, but note the raise.

In reply to Earnest Nicholas Samuel Ringgenberg (msg # 245):


Tommy could feel the adrenaline pumping as he grabbed his pack. He made sure to load the shotgun and grab a box of extra slugs. He donned his gunbelt and his pistol in his holster and he threw his jacket on.

He followed the group as the investigator guided them thru the darkness. Being at the back he was careful to keep an eye out behind them.

Suddenly he heard voices and a commotion up front toward where Tracey had stopped:


21:43, Today: Thomas Pearce rolled 4,1 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 4,1.  Notice Roll - Action card -- bennie reroll.
21:42, Today: Thomas Pearce rolled 3,3 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 3,3.  Notice Roll - Action card.

In reply to Thomas Pearce (msg # 246):

Tracy froze, seeing the men suddenly come upon them. For a moment, he worried about the danger his mistake had put his pards in. A moment later, he sharpened his focus.

OOC:

07:48, Today: Tracy Windham rolled 5,4 using d6,d6, rerolling max with rolls of 5,4.  Notice, hillock.

OOC: Thanks for the Notice rolls. Stand by for a post later this evening.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 248):

The four heroes react to their situation immediately, seeing the four men at the campsite atop the hill scrambling in response to the intruders entering from the ravine. It's not clear to the heroes whether the campers have weapons drawn or what they might intend to do in these few first fleeting moments, but they are all in clear sight some 20 yards away and perhaps 5 or 10 yards above on higher ground, illuminated by a small fire nearby.

Despite being at the rear of the group -- or perhaps because of it -- Tommy's keen senses kick in before anyone else, as he sees the men upon the hill.

---------------------

OOC: Normally, the Judge would likely have a map ready for such an encounter but for this play-test we will just roll without one.

There are no restrictions on movement or anything like that at this time; the marching order doesn't impact actions as the men exited form the ravine into a clear space.

Initiative Order
Earnest  Four Diamonds  Third
Jake Ten Hearts, Nine Spades Second
Tommy Eight Diamonds, Ten Spades First
Tracy  Three Spades Fourth
Campers Three Diamonds Fifth

It is Tommy's turn.

In reply to Judge Messalen (msg # 249):

Tommy caught up immediately with the others and seeing the men up on the hill realizes the heroes are at some disadvantage.

He calls out loudly "Howdy fellas, just passing through..didn't mean to startle you gents..not here to cause any trouble". He waits for a response from the hilltop

Free Actions
He motions to the Professor to put the lantern down and move back from it. Tommy takes several steps back into the darkness as well. Tommy readies his shotgun in both hands, it's not raised but his finger is on the trigger,

Action: None - on hold
This message was last edited by the player at 00:00, Thu 13 Feb 2020.

In reply to Thomas Pearce (msg # 250):

OOC: It is now Jake's action.

In reply to Thomas Pearce (msg # 250):

The fact that the sign that Mister Windham was following had led him directly to these mens' camp made Jake immediately suspicious of them, but thus far they had done nothing overtly hostile.

It would have been better if they had not blundered headlong into the camp, but the Texican was experienced enough to realize that these things happen sometimes, and that a body just had to play the hand that he was dealt.

~Hell, as best I recall from hearin' about it after the war, Gettysburg kinda happened that way, on account of Marse Robert not gettin' any ree-ports from Jeb Stuart an' blunderin' headlong into the Yankees. An' thaere shorely ain't no shaeme to it if'n it happened to Marse Robert.~

He stepped a little to the side, both to give himself a clear line of fire, if necessary, and so as not to be all bunched up with his pards if'n lead started flying. He rested his hand lightly atop the grip of his LeMat, but did left the weapon suck down between his belt and the outside of his trousers.

~Reckon I'll see how these others ree-spond to Mister Pearce's hail,~ he thought to himself.

---

OOC: Other than stepping a little to the side, Jake chooses to Hold his Actions. Depending upon how the men at the camp react, he may wish to try and interrupt their actions.

Edit: Fixed a typo and dropped an extraneous word in my OOC comments.
This message was last edited by the player at 18:34, Wed 12 Feb 2020.

In reply to Jacob Richardsen (msg # 252):

OOC: It is now Earnest's turn.