Any Risk generated on an Aid action goes to the person providing the Aid. It actually does mention it in the BRB, in the section on group actions in the Secular System chapter. I don't have the page number in front of me, because I haven't a book handy, but that's where it talks about Group actions/Aid and Risk.

I've been over this too and can't find it on hand, but I know this is the way it's supposed to work.

I would have assumed it was the way Jill thought it was, but I looked it up in order to help by providing the page number, and it turns out the BRB disagrees. On page 235 some sample downtimes are given, action #5 being an aid. When the result of that is given on the next page, it clearly states that the person *getting* the aid gets the risk: "This risk is given to Jael, so Castiel does help him but also causes him some trouble."

Hrm. I may have it backward. I'll confirm it with the most recent edition of the book.

Duh.
Yes.
Risk is applied to the *action*. Therefore, if you are Aiding someone, and you incur Risk, the Risk affects (or is a result of) the action itself. F'rinstance, you're trying to help your mentor heal himself after having been cut up, and you accidentally knock the ashtray into his wound (this happened in a non-KC game I played in. Whups). That doesn't affect *you* (except that now your mentor is all pissy about going to the bar with you), but it does affect the action (it's now more difficult for him to properly heal the wound).

In terms of KC, let's take the example of a Group Hunt. Usually, Risk in a Group Hunt results in the hunters arriving scattered, or somehow tipping off the prey that something is afoot. So if you Aid a Group Hunt (I dunno, you give the Group a map of the inside of the apartment building) and incur Risk, the character being Hunted knows what's up (1 Risk), calls in reinforcements (2 Risk, say), or actually somehow launches a counter-attack (3 Risk, perhaps).

If you Aid someone in their Rehabilitation, any Risk you incur would cause the character you're "helping" to take a Hindrance on their Healing Test.

If you Aid someone in Research, the Risk you incur might tip off the flakes at the hippie store that you're *actually* REAL LIFE ANGELS and you'll have to find a new store, or start giving 'angel readings' "for free" in the future.

Stuff like that.

Moral of the story: if you're Aiding someone, it's best to mitigate your Risk. Unless the whole point is to eff up their action, in which case, you must jump up and down and clap your hands loudly and holler: "I'M HELPING!!!"

Could we possibly re-examine this rule or at least add an addendum to Aid?

I understood Aid to be a somewhat shallow assistance, like feeding those who are Hunting or Investigating, or maybe getting a book out of the library for Research, etc. If this is the case, I don’t see the rationale of the Risk flowing to the base action, I see the Risk going to the Aider (maybe you start a fire in the kitchen or you lose library privileges because of too many overdue books - in any case, your Risk does not impeed the base action). Or in the example from the post above, maybe those hippie flakes start to follow YOU around because YOU acquired the Risk and maybe they think YOU are special.

If the Risk flows to the base action, then Aid and Sabotage become very similar (sure Becca, I’ll help you rehab that trauma this month...he he he). The difference is the target action taker will know who ‘helped’ them; with the Aider happily corrupting that action with no actual detriment to themselves (but Becca, I was only trying to help)...beyond possibly a role-playing relationship issue.

I propose that Risk from Aid should rest with the person who is responsible for taking the action that acquired the Risk. It’s fair, logical, and consistent with other rules.

If that is not possible, then I propose that during downtime when an Aid action is proposed, the ST contact the potential target of the Aid to explain that so-and-so wants to help with such-and-such and ask DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT THEIR HELP? If yes, fine ... if no, then the ST informs the Aider that their help is not wanted.

In general, with Risk flowing to the action instead of the person that acquired the Risk, the game system is encouraging secretive, individual action as opposed to promoting cooperative or group play where more people can be involved. I have the same beef with the interpretation of Predomination ... lets encourage group play and let those with the same Embodyment and similar morality work together.

Actually, Risk is *always* applied to the action on which it is incurred; it's just that in almost every other case, it is one character taking an action, and so one character experiences the consequences of the Risk incurred. Applying Risk in this way *is* consistent with existing rules. Also, this is how Risk -> Aid has been managed in Providence since the beginning (it's just been a Very Long Time since an Aid action did generate Risk).

The downtime system is meant to be a LOT more sneaky and underhanded than the actual game play. That's why there are so many actions intended to bugger things up and harm other characters, and far fewer actions intended to Make Things Better.

I am not fond of the idea of the SG asking the target of an Aid action if they want help. At all. First of all, for every Aid action (and there are many each month), that could forseeably add enough extra work, waiting for replies, etc., that it would be incredibly frustrating. At least it would be for this Storyguide.

If the Risk flows to the base action, then Aid and Sabotage become very
similar (sure Becca, I’ll help you rehab that trauma this month...he he
he). The difference is the target action taker will know who ‘helped’
them; with the Aider happily corrupting that action with no actual
detriment to themselves (but Becca, I was only trying to help)...beyond
possibly a role-playing relationship issue.

Yes, Aid and Sabotage *can* become similar, if you are playing a sneaky and underhanded character. The suggestion that the character providing Aid + Risk would have 'no actual detriment to themselves' I disagree with, because I would never assume that a 'role-playing relationship issue' is not paramount. In other words, it would seem to me that in a game based so heavily on relationships, throwing a wrench in any of those relationships makes roleplay more interested. In fact, the difference between Sabotage and Aid is HUGE, if you are actually *intending* to help someone. It wouldn't make sense to make an Aid action and hope that you get Risk if what you're really trying to do is eff something up.

Also, please remember that Risk *never causes an Action to fail*.

That being said, if an Action is not successful AND you incur Risk, the Risk effects still apply.

Also, you cannot give unrequested Aid.
It's written in the Aid section in the BRB, and in the examples of actions under "Aid" in the BRB.

I'm pretty sure that if you jump up and down and flap your arms and shout "I'M HELPING!!!", you're certainly Aiding *something*...

cenobyte wrote:Also, you cannot give unrequested Aid.
It's written in the Aid section in the BRB, and in the examples of actions under "Aid" in the BRB.

Then you have no problem in my submission of Gabe's actions from now in the following manner? After all, if I don't then how are you to know if I've solicited Aid.

Action #1: Hunt the splinter in my big toe. -- NO AID ACCEPTED.

As opposed to:
Action #1: Hunt the splinter in my big toe.

I'm sure with the latter wording, Arc would want to help and his clumsiness would lead to driving the splinter in deeper with those disease-ridden tweezers he insists on using. "Have faith," he says. Yeah, right.

Or maybe:
Action #1: Hunt the splinter in my big toe. AID from JORDAN only.

After all, Jordan might spend five hours examining the toe first, but Gabe knows that he won't strike for the splinter until he has the best angle and has sterilized those tweezers.

You're welcome to indicate on your actions that you have not requested aid.

That makes more sense than me having to ask the Aidee if they've asked So-and-so for help, then telling so-and-so that they can't Aid Whatsisname, then having to get actions re-submitted from So-and-so.

I'd also suggest that you not tell people if their Aid is rebuffed until they get their results. That would make me *very happy* for some reason.

Well, it would make me very happy, too, but I can imagine some people getting Very Upset at having wasted Marks if they *thought* their Aid had been requested.

Reason number seven hundred and two for Better Communication Skills, I guess.

"Well, it would make me very happy, too, but I can imagine some people
getting Very Upset at having wasted Marks if they *thought* their Aid
had been requested."

That, and aiding people who may or may not be submitting actions. *sigh*

Malicia wrote:"Well, it would make me very happy, too, but I can imagine some people getting Very Upset at having wasted Marks if they *thought* their Aid had been requested."

That, and aiding people who may or may not be submitting actions. *sigh*

You know, J., I think I'm all for Better Communication. After all, we have email, forums, and a Facebook group. I even hear that they have these devices from way back that allow you to talk to someone and hear their responses near instantly. I think they were called "foans".

As for aiding people who don't submit actions, I don't see the problem with that. Aid is about making it easier for someone else to get things done. If you do prep work to smooth the way, or set things up to help mid-month, then that is a good IC use of your time. If the other character doesn't follow through and doesn't use the help that you spend your time arranging, then that develops a good IC conflict to be resolved through role-playing. I would much rather aid an action that isn't taken then use the OOC knowledge of the absence of the action to not do what my character would do.

Would Gabe be extremely irate? Of course. Gabe has more things he wants to do than time to do it. Do you think that Gabe would ever aid the individual again? Gabe would likely decide to lead the action in following months rather than rely on others to spearhead things. It helps to establish reputations for both himself and other characters. If Gabe was asked to help someone and they didn't follow through, you can be sure that Gabe will spread the word that it is a waste of time to help that person.

True. True. That does put a different perspective on it. Thanks!