@OurLadyOfWires
I have some concerns about splitting the planning into phases. For two main reasons: we'll wind up doing person-specific actions anyways, and I think it'll be hard to avoid making Velvet plans even in this first phase, especially because Bits are very important as a cross-over limitation between the phases.
Person-specific Planning
In part because of our 'tall' build, our followers have pretty unique skillsets. Our mortal followers are good at certain things, and mediocre (base stats don't cut it!) at others. On the other hand, Names's actions are
so powerful we generally want them doing specific things that best leverage those skills. I think this means we'll still wind up planning actions based on "Person X does Action Y" --
because we wouldn't take Action Y unless we had the person best-suited to it.
I guess it might be different when we also have a trio of Mares-in-the-Light, and a Forge summon, and (etc.). But even then, the fact that Lore levels make followers just so much better at specific things means we'll still want actions that best use those skills. The pool is generally only useful when we don't know what to do with someone... but that's what 'cover our bases' is for.
Being able to 'cover our bases' is fantastic and I definitely think it makes the game (and narrative) better! But I'm not sure how much moving to a pool of actions will really change things.
Phase Entanglement
The one exception to the above is Velvet. She can do everything well! She's one hell of a horse.
Because of that, if we have a specific action we want to undertake, we almost always face the choice of use a follower
or use Velvet. As a consequence,
making a decision that a follower does something tends to be deciding that Velvet won't. And so I worry we'll wind up having to ~basically make Velvet's plan even in this first phase.
Thinking about this turn, for example. If we want to supercharge Velvet's SH and do some searching, we probably also want her searching for a Level 5 book. But if we don't go down that route, we might want Jade scrying for one. Do we want Luna to summon a creature, or do we want Velvet to? Do we want Mareinette to social a specific friend, or do we want Velvet to?
Because we shape Velvet's planning based on our followers' planning, we wind up making Velvet decisions even in Phase 1.
The AP/Bit Dilemma
Of course, there are also two resources that explicitly stretch over the phases -- the resources that constrain our planning, AP and Bits.
I think these will further intensify the need to make Velvet's plan during the follower phase. We might be okay with respect to AP -- though we're already faced with the question of "How badly do we need an extra action" (and discussing things above), +/-1 AP is probably manageable.
It's much more of an issue with Bits. Expeditions or rituals are fairly expensive, so spending bits on Followers doing them means not spending bits on Velvet doing rituals. This is particularly highlighted by the Commission action --
it's built to give us +100 bits for the turn, but we won't know if we need them until we decide on Velvet's plan.
Whew, that was a lot! I really appreciate the thought you put into this, Bird, and I hope you take this as someone who really likes this quest (and planning for it!) thinking through its implications. I'd be curious as to other readers' thoughts on the above, as well.
I definitely agree that planning was getting large (though not unfeasible). I think that might just unavoidable for a late stage quest, in some ways? (We don't have it as bad as Divided Loyalties or Marked for Death, at least..?)
Ultimately, I worry we're trading some ease in the process of decision-making (having fewer vote options at a given time, as we'll still be making mostly follower-specific decisions) for a lot messier actual decision-making in practice (having to plan Velvet's actions without an actual plan or voting).