Questions for the Boss man

[admiralducksauce]

That's great. That sets up as close as one gets to precedent that a willing target can Concede a Transformation effect, so long as they are in a position to Concede.

So which of the following would represent the minimum stress needed to Transform a willing target?:
A) Target's Defense skill + Target's Stress tracks + 5 shifts (4 for the best possible defense roll, +1 to justify a Concession)
or
B) Target's Defense skill + Target's Stress tracks + 1 shifts (to justify a Concession instead of rolling a Defense check)

I think B's your technical minimum, but A is your minimum in practice.  I see the "4 shifts needed to overcome a defense roll" as simple insurance.

[devonapple]

I think B's your technical minimum, but A is your minimum in practice.  I see the "4 shifts needed to overcome a defense roll" as simple insurance.

One does need to Concede before rolling the defense roll, if I read YS 206 correctly:

Finally, a character cannot be saved from a roll that takes him out by offering a concession. You have to offer the concession before the roll that takes out your character. Otherwise, it’s cheating the opponent out of victory.

[wyvern]

As a note on YS206: I read that a bit differently.  It doesn't mean you need to concede before rolling defense.  It does mean that if you literally can't soak all the shifts of an attack (defense rolled yet or not), concession is no longer on the table.  However, I could totally see a player saying "Yeah, I could keep fighting if I took a severe consequence... but I don't think this conflict is worth that; can we work out a reasonable concession instead?" - and that'd be perfectly OK in my games.  Of course, the terms of such a concession would be rather less favorable than if they'd conceded before the attack (and thus before a severe consequence was on the line)... but it'd still be a concession, not a take-out.

This even goes for extreme consequences - but if a PC would need to take an extreme to stay in the fight, all that conceding will really buy them is that they're not going to die.

[sinker]

That actually seems more in line with what Fred said here.

No, concessions are done only in the face of stress. You'd have to deal enough stress to exceed the target's stress track for it to make sense for concessions to come into play. So that's your minimum.

This confuses me a bit. If you deal enough stress to exceed their stress track, then aren't they just taken out at that point, no concessions necessary?

That's the point at which they're:

- Taking a consequence and staying in the fight, or
- Conceding (though they could take a consequence), or
- Taken out (because they cannot take a consequence)

Sounds like a concession is an option in the face of taking a consequence, and that a taken out result can only occur when all available consequences are filled.