TorgHacker wrote:Still don't like it. I'd never read it like that, and now the most efficient way for defeating 15 mooks is to punch, stab, and shoot 5 each rather than shoot 15 with a machine gun.
With different result numbers for each, different damage bonuses for each...uggghhhhhhhhhhhh....
Additionally, my argument was that the Multi-Targeting rules don't specify that you apply them by groups:
Totally with you. My reading had always been that Multi-Action and Multi-Targeting are indeed separate, but are also
both.. absolute, I guess? Count up the number of Actions you're doing (eg., Skills you're using) and that's -2 for each; count up the number of Targets you're affecting, and that's -2 for each. And since you kind of automatically make both of those counts just in declaring your action anyway, that's simple and easy and, I think, makes more sense. And it doesn't
contradict the rules as written, it's just..how you look at them, I guess.
If you're trying to stab and intimidate someone, that's a Multi-Action and you have a -2. If you're trying to stab one person while Intimidating another, that's two Actions affecting two Targets, so you're at a -4, and that makes sense
to me because you are
splitting your attention, and that should
Admittedly, that does kind of mean that if you're trying to hurt-and-intimidate two people, you might as well do both to both because that doesn't change your penalties at all, but overall that seems like less of a problem and above all, as you say, a whole lot
simpler at the table than actually splitting out your Multi-Action and then applying all different numbers to everyone.
...um, have I mentioned that I do not... always... 100% agree with Darrell?
TorgHacker wrote:The reason we do this is that there's estimates that 50% of those who buy a product actually never even play it. They just read it. So we have to make THAT part of the experience good too.
Also, every once in a while (I think this is like the fourth time) you really
open my eyes to something I had just never noticed or thought about before. Plus just... it would be awful to try to write
with the kind of precision that players start to want when we really get into the weeds. When I read that message it just... yeah, that's everywhere, so much so that I've always just taken it for granted and never even noticed it was there. This is definitely one I'll think about and work on internalizing better! Thank you.