Righteousness and Desperate Hour

[zerogain]

The "Desperate Hour" function (trapping?) of "Righteousness" (YS 188) indicates that the True Believer can run some sort of attack in response to a friend, ally, or innocent (or themselves) being seriously injured/affected/taken out.

I am unclear as to whether or not this stages as an interrupt, or whether this is simply retribution. Any input?

[Tedronai]

My interpretation is that this functions only in retribution.
Otherwise, you get the possibility of paradox.

[Rougarou]

Depends on your definition of interrupt, in my opinion.

Can it be used to stop the consequence/taken out/etc. that triggers it... No.

But I guess you could consider it an interrupt in that it can be used immediately, without regard to whose turn it is. At least that's my interpretation of it and how it's been used in my games.

[Tedronai]

Sigh.
Rougarou expressed my position more clearly than I did.

[Silverblaze]

You guys let it be used out of turn?

Does it take up said character's normal action then?

I've been waiting until my turn to use it.....

[Chrono]

My understanding was always that this should be an action for a regular turn.

[Rougarou]

My understanding was always that this should be an action for a regular turn.

While the RAW doesn't specify, I've always interpreted it as being done immediately. That way if it's the PC using it that takes the severe consequence that triggers it, there's no opportunity for him to be taken out before it happens. Plus it feels more dramatic that way.

Does it take up said character's normal action then?

This has never come up for us, because the character using it was always taken out before his next turn. (Which is why I don't make him wait, see?) But, I would still allow him a normal action if he ever survived till his next turn. My reasoning is, again, because it's a little more dramatic that way, also because it takes little to no time to mutter a prayer and the character isn't doing anything after, his god is. I just don't see any reason to make it cost him his turn. If it were being abused in my games, I'd feel differently and my house rules would change.

[Sanctaphrax]

I've always assumed that it did not take an action.

But I just reread it and it's a bit vague.

Pity. I always thought that Righteousness was a well-written, solid, Power. Seeing a hole in its writing is a bit disheartening.

I think I'll keep using the same interpretation as before.

[Chrono]

Well if it increases the drama then it's probably the Dresden way to do it!

[Silverblaze]

I approve of this idea and will bombard my Gm with this proposal immediately!

[Rougarou]

I've always assumed that it did not take an action.

But I just reread it and it's a bit vague.

Pity. I always thought that Righteousness was a well-written, solid, Power. Seeing a hole in its writing is a bit disheartening.

I think I'll keep using the same interpretation as before.

Exactly, it's so well written otherwise, that I always assumed the lack of wording like "on your next turn" or "immediately, at the cost of your next turn" to mean it happens immediately without costing the next action. It's served me well for the reasons I listed above.