Guidance in conflicts

[Darren Hill]

One thing I'm a little unclear on.
The Moons have guidance over characters in, say, hierarchical or romantic relationships.
The Mistaken makes conflict statements.
What happens when a character's lover is in a conflict with the Heart? More precisely, does the Mistaken now have complete control over what the lover does or says within the confines of this conflict*, and is thus able to have the character do things the Moon would object to?
(*: which, given the things you can add with conflict statements, isn't much of a limit.)
The Mistaken is in control of demons, so can he say, "your lover is possessed, so I now get to say what she does and says" ?

Now I know that the Heart can use the conflict system to negotiate any statements the Mistaken makes - that's irrelevant to this question, which is just about the scope of Guidance.

[Ben Lehman]

One thing I'm a little unclear on.
The Moons have guidance over characters in, say, hierarchical or romantic relationships.
The Mistaken makes conflict statements.

Yes.

What happens when a character's lover is in a conflict with the Heart? More precisely, does the Mistaken now have complete control over what the lover does or says within the confines of this conflict*, and is thus able to have the character do things the Moon would object to?

Let's differentiate for a second here: Are we discussing conflict (like, say a fight) between the lover and the protagonist in the fiction?  Or are we discussing conflict in the formalized, key phrases sense?  Because these are very different things.

In the first case, you just play out the fight.

The second case is more complicated.  Say the New Moon is playing Rischia and the Heart is playing Rigel.

NM: I stare up at you with my beautiful eyes wet with tears.  "Please," I say, "by your love of me please don't go."  You're convinced.

Heart: Hrm... I really don't want to.  But it was no matter.  I'm not convinced.

The Mistaken can now decide whether to second the Heart's brush-off or whether to make a conflict out of it.  Let's say that she makes a conflict out of it.

Mistaken: We shall see what comes of it.

Now, conflict begins between the Heart and the Mistaken.

In conflict and only in conflict you can make statements outside of your realm of guidance.  So, for instance, the Heart starts this conflict.

Heart: But only if the knights win a great battle even without me.  (Note, this is outside of his guidance, but since he's making a conflict statement, it's okay.)

Mistaken:  And furthermore Rischia makes you promise never to leave her side again.  (This is also outside of her normal realm of guidance, but it's a conflict statement, so it's okay.)

Heart: It shall not come to pass!

and so on...

The Mistaken is in control of demons, so can he say, "your lover is possessed, so I now get to say what she does and says" ?

Yup!  Of course, it can be contested as normal.  And, further, the demon possessing the lover should have a name and goals and identity and so on.  No fair just using possession to grab characters.

Of course, a Moon could say "my beauty is so great that the demon breaks down in tears and cannot bear to harm me."  Dictating the effects of your character on another character is totally within the realm of guidance.

Does that clear things up?

yrs--
--Ben

P.S.  Extra credit for anyone playing along at home: Given the above, why is "And furthermore" an incredibly strong opening statement?

[Darren Hill]

Yes we were discussing the second case, and that makes everything clear - I shall remember the simple statement: In conflict and only in conflict you can make statements outside of your realm of guidance.

Can you give some examples of using And Furthermore at the start of a conflict? I can see it's a powerful statement inside combat (I'm keen to spring it on someone in play - when I get the chance to play that is!), I'm not sure what sort of situations it would be used in to kickstart a conflict.

[LordSmerf]

P.S.  Extra credit for anyone playing along at home: Given the above, why is "And furthermore" an incredibly strong opening statement?

Check out TonyLB's and Ben's comments in Popping the stack for a fuller explanation, but...

I think that the use of "And furthermore..." here ties the "But only if..." to itself.  It weakens the force a "But only if..." response by the Heart.  RIght?

Thomas

[Victor Gijsbers]

P.S.  Extra credit for anyone playing along at home: Given the above, why is "And furthermore" an incredibly strong opening statement?

Because you cannot answer with "It was not meant to be". If your opponent doesn't like your statement, he cannot chicken out but will have to fight against it the hard way.

[Frank T]

Despite my resolution to take a break from the Forge, I find myself lurking. Well, Indie Games Forums don't count.

The powerful thing about AND FURTHERMORE, of course, is that it instantly turns the previous statement into undisputable fact.

- Frank

[Frank T]

Funny how, after reading the "Popping the stack" part, Victor's assertion seems much more sensible than mine. Because what I said is just as true about AND THAT WAS HOW IT HAPPENED. Well, that should teach me to stick to my own resolutions.

- Frank

[Ben Lehman]

No one worry about it.

When (if) ever I write A Polaris Companion I'll have a little "guide to conflict strategies."  :-)

yrs--
--Ben

[Darren Hill]

I'll take a stab at this:
AND FURTHERMORE, as I understand it, this is exactly the same as IF ONLY, except you pay a cost (the theme) to narrow your opponent's options - if he doesn't want to pay a Theme, he has to either accept it (AND THAT WAS HOW IT HAPPENED) or roll the dice (YOU ASK FAR TOO MUCH) - which is pretty much the same as accepting it, early or late in the game.
So, if the opponent doesn't want to accept your statement, he must pay a theme to use the phrase, YOU ASK FAR TOO MUCH, which then allows you to state something different but equally severe and give him a real dilemma. There's a chance here that the opponent will end up accepting your original statement, after paying a theme to have a chance at changing it. In any case, you have made two statements, one of which your opponent MUST accept.

Is the above all correct?
One thing: Ben, you asked why AND FURTHERMORE is such a powerful statement to open a conflict. I don't know what is special about opening a conflict with it, as opposed to using it any time in a conflict. Is there some subtlety I'm missing?