7 thoughts on “Seize by Force isn’t clear for me. Why would anybody choose to suffer harm?”

  1. page 195, during combat choosing to “suffer little harm” reduces the harm you would normally receive by -1, and choosing to “inflict terrible harm” increases the harm you do by +1.

    Why would you choose to NOT reduce harm by -1? Because you might have armor, or because taking a serious wound while simultaneously inflicting terrible harm would also impress, dismay, or frighten everyone who witnesses it.

  2. To restate what has been said above:

    Seize by force, unlike Go aggro, assumes the other person is armed (maybe just with their fists) and they are going to fight/shoot back. So you’re going to take harm no matter what. “suffering little harm” means you lower that incoming harm by 1.

    Go aggro is threatening with violence or harming an unaware/unprepared enemy. Seize is going into a straight up fight.

  3. In other words, if the victim is incapable of fighting back, you don’t roll seize by force, you just take what you want, spit in their face, and maybe kick them a few time for fun. Let’s face it, you’re an asshole.

  4. There are plenty of ways to Go Aggro on an armed opponent.  Most of them are things like Covering Fire (“Keep your head down and just take potshots or get shot.  Your choice.” ) or somehow ambushing them by getting behind them (a Battlebabe speciality – two  rounds acting under fire to sneak into position then going ka-chunk with their shotgun from just behind the enemy or wrapping a spiked chain round their throat and daring them to do anything but drop their weapon and put their hands on their head).  But if you’re trying to aim and are in range of the enemy that’s seizing by force.  As is trying to do things fast.

Comments are closed.