12-14-2015, 01:51 PM
If there is a mechanical action that is taken, we can easily write around that in the RP. We don't need to take everything at face value.
Example:
I block Tom's super, Orion retaliates and ends up hitting Tom. A super move hit the target, and the mechanical requirements were met.
In the situation where Tom counters a super with a super, I use my defense on his, negating his defense, meaning that, in a mechanical sense, the clash never happened. Now, Ganny described a clash, sure, but that doesn't have to be THE clash, and neither does his posting negate my ability to use a super defense, which I am using specifically to cancel it Tom's which, again, means that in a mechanical sense the clash shouldn't happen.
Is it messy to have to write around mechanics sometimes? Yeah, but its also the system. Having Orion be blocked and then hit Tom with another blast accomplished in the narrative what hastened outside if the narrative. It works, and it's an effective use of the rules
Example:
I block Tom's super, Orion retaliates and ends up hitting Tom. A super move hit the target, and the mechanical requirements were met.
In the situation where Tom counters a super with a super, I use my defense on his, negating his defense, meaning that, in a mechanical sense, the clash never happened. Now, Ganny described a clash, sure, but that doesn't have to be THE clash, and neither does his posting negate my ability to use a super defense, which I am using specifically to cancel it Tom's which, again, means that in a mechanical sense the clash shouldn't happen.
Is it messy to have to write around mechanics sometimes? Yeah, but its also the system. Having Orion be blocked and then hit Tom with another blast accomplished in the narrative what hastened outside if the narrative. It works, and it's an effective use of the rules
![[Image: sig2.jpg]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v288/KrimTheUnsettler/sig2.jpg)