Quick rules/ruling question.

Quick rules/ruling question.

Quick rules/ruling question. I’ve watched a live-play example of The Sprawl where the characters were in an airborne vehicle flying over restricted airspace to get to the destination for their mission. On the way, an automated air traffic control system asked them for the appropriate authorization codes. The players wanted to use [intel] or [gear] for these, and were told by the MC that they it couldn’t be used in this case, as [intel] adds +1 to a roll, and that this information wasn’t really [gear]. What are your thoughts?

Now, to be fair, not having the codes did not stop the players from continuing on with their plan, and so maybe it was a situation of using the MC move “Make their lives complicated,” but it seems to me like at least [gear] could be spent in this way (maybe the codes are on a datachip)?

12 thoughts on “Quick rules/ruling question.”

  1. I’m with John. Mechanically speaking, I don’t believe there is anything in the rules that says they couldn’t have used Gear for something like a password or code. My memory of that particularly episode of Roll20 is a little foggy, but I think the issue they were having involved the fact that there wasn’t a person on the receiving end to receive a code or password. It was less about generating the code and more about the vehicle not having authorization based on some sort of specific ID registration it had, but I could be wrong.

  2. I would tend towards [intel] for this, but if the characters had been somewhere that they could have reasonably picked up a physical item with the code on it, then [gear] could work too.

    The important thing is that the primary function of [intel] is to give fictional positioning. The +1 is a bonus (pun not intended).

  3. Hamish Cameron That’s great to hear confirmation on. I think Adam’s interpretation of the rules led me to believe that the important part of Intel was the +1 and that kept my group from believing that it was as general purpose as you intended it.

  4. Hamish Cameron In the example the OP provided, would you require fictional justification on how the [intel] received provided the PC’s with the clearance code in order for them to use it in that way? For instance, let’s say a PC tapped a contact during a legwork phase and rolled a 10+ netting them some [intel]. This hypothetical contact is a street punk and would have no knowledge of corporate fly zone clearance codes. Would you still let the PCs use the Intel when it wouldn’t make sense for the contact they received it from to know the info they used it on?

  5. If they hadn’t done any investigation that could have turned up the passcode, then I probably wouldn’t allow the spend, but remember that it’s up to the player to give the fictional justification for why they have that info.

  6. Hamish Cameron Using [intel] in this way makes a lot more sense then just giving the players a +1 to a roll, but now that I’m shifting my thinking based on this info and the flexibility of what [intel] can do, I’m wondering if you would mind providing us with an example of how you’d implement a +1 forward in the case that [intel] was used to gain a keypad passcode (for example)? Does used [intel] always give the player a +1 forward when used or is it an either or kind of thing (fictional positioning, or a +1)? I guess I’m not seeing how you can take a +1 when acting on a bit of used [intel] when the use was an all or nothing thing (keypad passcode) that wouldn’t require a roll to use.

  7. I think of the +1 forward as a bonus… much like keeping the gear gained with [gear] is a bonus. Or like the “+1 forward when using the answer” from assess. Maybe (frequently in the latter case!) you never use it.

  8. From my understanding, and as mentioned by Brandon, the issue wasn’t that they couldn’t justify a passcode. The problem Adam had was that they were flying a civilian aircraft in restricted military airspace.

    No passcode could counter the fact that their aircraft was not meant to be there.

    The problem wasn’t a matter of passcodes or access, it was an issue of the player’s attempt to use the [intel] in a way that went against the established fiction. Entirely by mistake mind you!

Comments are closed.