11 thoughts on “Using “Open Fire/Launch Assault” vs.”

  1. Depends on how we at the table see it resolving. Multiple rolls or single rolls. That said, I regularly use multiple Open Fire/Launch Assault rolls based on threat groupings, so it works out the same.

  2. I typically see open fire/launch assault as a single resolution of a longer fight.

    Face adversity might be used to take a single shot as a diversion while on the run or to drop kick some jabronies as you are fleeing the space port.

    But if you are ducking behind cover and opening up with your guns. An extended fire fight or a melee brawl then you use the open fire/launch assault move.

    Single action vs multi-action scenes. If that makes sense

  3. I was thinking that, for important fights, you would need a large number of face adversity moves to even get to a fight-ending open fire/launch assault move. So what Chalice In Chains said.

  4. So, I’m trying to wrap my head around doing “Open Fire/Launch Assault with multiple PCs taking part in the same combat. Is there a limit to how many characters can “get involved” to help with a roll? Or would that case be better to do a back and forth of “Face Adversity”?

  5. Tim Osburn so heres the deal – threat grouping matters based on who’s acting. If you have three ultramarines in the room, the diplomat with a pen won’t be able to take out all three in one Launch Assault. Maybe one, maybe zero.

    So maybe the diplomat Launches Assault, kills one. At the same time, the engineer pulls his holdout pistol and Opens Fire. But he’s an engineer and they’re trained ultramarines. So we make the same ruling – he can get one. So that means two rolls, for two ultramarines.

    But let’s pretend they both fail. Oh shit, they’re gonna die. But in comes the big bruiser on the team, with his laser Gatling gun. Brrrrrr. Yeah he can Open Fire on all three at once.

    Threat groupings are super important.

  6. Aaron Griffin That isn’t exactly what I was asking. Let’s say you have 4 PCs, and they have decent ranged weapons. They come across a group of about 8 space pirates who immediately move to shoot at them. (Soft move)

    Since “Open Fire” is about resolving an entire combat, would you just have one PC initiate the “Open Fire” move while the other 3 take action to trigger “Get Involved” to aid the PC making the “Open Fire” roll?

  7. Important distinction: Open Fire/Launch Assault is a means to accomplish a goal by using violence. A combat encounter usually has multiple objectives that can be approached with violence, and more objectives can be opened up by using other skills during the combat.

    If the combat is very simple (a straight firefight with a small group of poorly equipped enemies in an open room) then that’s a simple Open Fire. One character leads, everyone else describes their support, and Get Involves are made as needed.

    The question is: What makes this combat situation complicated enough to warrant multiple characters? What are they doing?

    > Multiple enemy groups/powerful individuals that must be tackled separately. The characters should split up, or the ones they don’t engage will cause havoc unopposed.

    > Enemy technology or tactics that prevent or punish the use of Open Fire/Launch Assault. Those have to be handled first, usually with other skills. Stealth needs to be countered or spotted, enemies need to be flushed out of cover or an alternate route needs to be found, etc.

    > Secondary time-sensitive objectives that will pull some characters away.

    Ultimately, remember that combat is not meant to be a long, time-consuming affair at the table. You don’t need multiple rolls and an hour of “do you hit? how much damage? do I hit? take this much damage. Your turn, do you hit? How much damage?” to determine the outcome.

  8. Sean Gomes In my example, it’s not so much that it is “complicated”, but the situation just springs upon them by surprise. (Let’s say an ambush.) A bunch of bad guys show up and just start shooting at the PCs, so it wouldn’t make too much sense in the fiction that only one PC shoots back while the rest just hang around and watch. With the fictional positioning of the situation, it stands to reason that all the PCs would be shooting back as well.

  9. Ah true, they are absolutely all firing back. But they don’t need to all roll.

    Consider who’s the focus of the encounter, who has the most suitable weapon or tools to deal with the ambush. (Armored ambushers, who has a penetrating weapon, etc). Who is the narrative camera focusing on? That’s the character making the Roll.

    Now, assuming the Open Fire is a complete success? Do a rapid-fire back-and-forth and include all the characters participating. Go through each and get them to do a quick, stylish/brutal/heroic/silly description of their contribution to the fight.

    Example: “PC#1, an ambusher leaps out, cape flapping, twin pistols blasting, what do you do?. [PC#1 description] PC#2, another ambusher has a cooked grenade! He winds up and… /prompting motion [PC#2 description]. PC#3, one of the ambusher stayed back, and is taking aim with a makeshift sniper rifle, they’ve got PC#1 in their sights, what do you do? [And so forth]

    Now, if the Roll is a partial success or a failure? Well, it’s time for one of the other participants to step up and Roll a Get Involved. Because that’s a sign the fight is not going well, so it’s time for a push and time for a second character to become the focus of the “Camera” as they take the risks to rescue/assist the first character.

    Participating in rolling to determine the result is not nearly as important as participating in weaving a cool, vivid description of the scene.

  11. Hard to write anything to add to excellent answers by Sean Gomes.

    I would say that you should keep your party split and working on multiple objectives, this system really handles party splits very well, so divide them into team of 2 with your MC moves or give them few objectives so they have to divide themselves. That way you can avoid having 4 PC killing machines vs one small group of 8 mooks.

Comments are closed.