The Forge Archives

Independent Game Forums => Muse of Fire Games => Topic started by: Andrew Cooper on December 20, 2005, 08:29:25 AM



Title: A strategy question...
Post by: Andrew Cooper on December 20, 2005, 08:29:25 AM
Bob, Fred and Bill are playing.  Bob sets down "Goal: Super Schmoo saves the day!"  Fred goes next and decides to pick up the red die and roll it.  He gets a 3.  Bill goes last and picks up the blue die and rolls it getting a 6.

Bob then passes control of the next Page to Fred and everyone gets a chance to claim Conflicts starting with Fred.  Fred looks at the Conflict on the table and claims the blue die, since it is a 6 and not a 3 even though he wasn't the one who rolled up the 6.  Assuming that Fred went on to win the Conflict he could then narrate whatever result he wanted, correct?  I mean, the red and blue die are just different sides to the Conflict and it is perfectly legal to leap in and claim the highest side to an unclaimed Conflict even if your intent is narrate something completely different than the player who has rolled up the die to that point, right?

Is there something in the rules that prevents this or am I on the right track?


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: TonyLB on December 20, 2005, 09:35:35 AM
When Fred rolled the die on the red side, and accepted an increase in its value, his character became Allied to that side.  This is both valuable (he becomes eligible for story tokens if his side loses) and restricting.

Fred may claim the side he is Allied to in the conflict (i.e. the red).  Because he is allied to the red side, Fred may not choose to claim the blue side.  Bill may also claim the side he is allied to (i.e. the blue).  Bob may claim either side, since he is not (yet) allied to either of them (and, yes, there are some tricks you can do to take advantage of that ambiguity).

So, no, Fred can't claim the higher side just because it's higher.  Details on page 22.

Does that answer your question?


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Andrew Cooper on December 20, 2005, 09:38:07 AM
Yes, it does.  Thanks Tony!


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Andrew Cooper on December 20, 2005, 09:42:18 AM
Ack... but I thought of another question.  Silly me.  My understanding is that it is possible to roll on both sides of a Conflict in order to make yourself eligible for Story Tokens regardless of who wins.  If you have rolled for both sides, does this mean that you are capable of Claiming either side or is the side you rolled for first the only side you can Claim?


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: TonyLB on December 20, 2005, 10:00:17 AM
The side you rolled for most recently (with that character) is the side that you can claim.  When you switch allegiance you lose your old allegiance (although you are still eligible as someone who was on the losing side at one point.

This gets even more complicated if the player has multiple characters, of course.

If I play Zak on the red side of "Destroy Chrysalis Station" and simultaneously play "Monumentally Bad Decision" on the blue side of that same conflict then I have a right to claim either side (or both!)  And, of course, I can get story tokens however it works out, since I opposed ... well ... everything.


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Andrew Cooper on December 20, 2005, 10:14:41 AM
Ah...  now it all makes sense.  I shall now go forth and oppose everything.



Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Hans on December 21, 2005, 10:23:59 AM
I just wanted to point out something that happened to me that seems related to this topic:

I am playing Mr. Glitter.  One of the other players is playing the Supremicist, a very nasty, bigoted fellow.  In order to distract him, I play the goal "Humiliate Mr. Glitter" for the Supremicist, which his player does not veto.

Here is the problem...I play this goal as my last action in a round, as the last person in the turn order.  Therefore, at this point, no one is allied on either side, as no one has rolled on it.  At the beginning of the the next page, two players, both of them BAD guys, claim either side of this conflict.  I am completely shut out.  No matter who resolves this conflict, poor Mr. Glitter is going to have a hard time of it.  I did succeed at distracting the bad guys...but only at the cost of my dignity.

Therefore, as a point of strategy, if you are last in the turn order, be VERY careful about laying down new conflicts.


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: dunlaing on December 21, 2005, 12:54:21 PM
Hans: On your turn, you can spend two debt on whichever side is winning, then split the die and take one of the dice off to the side to form a Third side of the conflict. Then roll that puppy up and if you can be either tied with the highest side or higher than the other side, your conflict will survive until the next page. You need Debt and luck, but it's at least possible.


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Sydney Freedberg on December 21, 2005, 01:39:17 PM
You can even "split" off your own side by just putting in one point of Debt, even, but that just gives you one die, so in practice you'd usually want to invest more if you really want to win.


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Hans on December 22, 2005, 05:47:17 AM
Hans: On your turn, you can spend two debt on whichever side is winning, then split the die and take one of the dice off to the side to form a Third side of the conflict. Then roll that puppy up and if you can be either tied with the highest side or higher than the other side, your conflict will survive until the next page. You need Debt and luck, but it's at least possible.

Gad!  I should have thought of that!  I remember reading about that in the rules, but it just didn't occur to me at that moment. 


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: dunlaing on December 22, 2005, 07:46:44 AM
Gad!  I should have thought of that!  I remember reading about that in the rules, but it just didn't occur to me at that moment. 

I'm playing in a WWII Supers Capes play by post and you just made me think of a great character for that game,... a Free French resistance fighter named l'Esprit de l'Escalier. Thanks!


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Hans on December 22, 2005, 08:09:18 AM
Gad!  I should have thought of that!  I remember reading about that in the rules, but it just didn't occur to me at that moment. 

I'm playing in a WWII Supers Capes play by post and you just made me think of a great character for that game,... a Free French resistance fighter named l'Esprit de l'Escalier. Thanks!

"The spirit of the staircase"?  This sounds like a surrealist/dadaist superhero.  What if Marcel Duchamp or Salvador Dali had super powers?  Or does my French translation program just suck? 


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: TonyLB on December 22, 2005, 08:18:50 AM
It's a phrase that means all the snappy comebacks and perfect things to say that you realize only as you are walking down the staircase having left the garret where you were having the discussion.

"Oh, man, I should have said 'But where would you get a monkey at this hour?' ... agggh! ... that would have been so perfect."


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Hans on December 22, 2005, 10:10:12 AM
It's a phrase that means all the snappy comebacks and perfect things to say that you realize only as you are walking down the staircase having left the garret where you were having the discussion.

"Oh, man, I should have said 'But where would you get a monkey at this hour?' ... agggh! ... that would have been so perfect."

Aha.  I am so uncultured. 


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: dunlaing on December 22, 2005, 12:05:46 PM
This one time, when I was in elementary school, my Mom was yelling at me and she said "You are a son of a bitch!" and I looked her in the face and said "You're right." She stopped for a second, then started laughing and was no longer mad at me.

That is the opposite of l'esprit de l'escalier.


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: TonyLB on December 22, 2005, 12:55:39 PM
Aha.  I am so uncultured. 

Well, I got it second-hand from Neil Gaiman, so I'm not sure it actually counts as culture.


Title: Re: A strategy question...
Post by: Sindyr on March 12, 2006, 03:17:27 PM
The side you rolled for most recently (with that character) is the side that you can claim.  When you switch allegiance you lose your old allegiance (although you are still eligible as someone who was on the losing side at one point.

This gets even more complicated if the player has multiple characters, of course.

If I play Zak on the red side of "Destroy Chrysalis Station" and simultaneously play "Monumentally Bad Decision" on the blue side of that same conflict then I have a right to claim either side (or both!)  And, of course, I can get story tokens however it works out, since I opposed ... well ... everything.

I don't understand this.  Could you go through it step by step?  How can a player claim both sides of a Conflict?  Wouldn't this be a winning strategy to getting story tokens, especially is someone has staked debt, but even if you are the one stking the debt for purposes of conversion?