[Wiedergänger] First ideas for a game...

[neph]

Hi there!

I'm one of the Projekt Odyssee authors from Germany and part-time Forge-reader (though not poster). The successful cooperation at the Essen game fair made me think about posting an idea for a game on the Forge. So I'll give it a try. I intend to use it for oneshots or very short campaigns.
I'll keep it as short as possible only writing about  the parts that I think are essential for my ideas:

Wiedergänger
(an old german name for undead)

The game is about playing lately deceased undead which are kept in the world due to some unfinished business. The problem is that the Wiedergänger themselves have forgotten the circumstances which lead to their death due to the trauma of dying. So they have no idea what the unfinished business is all about. Now they are working against time to find out what went wrong and what they have to do, to get their final peace. The things that keep the Wiedergänger from leaving must not be his own mistakes or wrongdoings but can be any things that went wrong concerning his death.

Every character has some "anchors", things that are somehow involved with his death and keep him from escaping to the afterlife (or whatever) and every anchor is bound to a certain emotion and has a numerical value which shows how strong it is ("Wife (love) 3" for example).
The sum of all anchors is the strength of the soul and a sign of how long and well the soul can sustain the body. All characters are drawn towards their anchors.

Now every time a character confronts an anchor the associated emotion provokes a flashback. In these flashbacks the character learns some details involving this anchors which lead (sooner or later) to his death. With every flashback the number associated with this anchor is reduced by one, and every flashback has to link to some other anchor (those of other characters included, this way anchors produce something like a relationship map) so that the story progresses. The flashback that reduces the last anchor to zero reveals the final circumstances of the death and what the character has to do to be redeemed. But with no power left to his soul time is really ticking or the soul will find destruction rather than final peace.

While the strength of the soul decreases with every flashback, it gets harder and harder for the soul to sustain the body, resulting in ghastly appearance of the Wiedergänger but while they leave their mortal life behind they find out that they are not anymore limited by human means and they can get special "powers". Characters may even sacrifice some of their strength ("embrace the beast") to get these powers to try to solve their problem in the quick & nasty way.

A Wiedergänger is a disturbance in the fabric of reality. He is supposed to be dead and gone but he's still walking around. The world compensates by ignoring the undead. They are not part of the natural order and normal people will try to avoid any Wiedergänger, they will not even recognize them or treat them like homeless or beggars. If a Wiedergänger stands in the main walkway of a crowded shopping mall the people will part before him and close behind him and no one will remember him afterwards. If he confronts someone directly the person will try to get rid of him as soon as possible and not remember any details.

But reality is not as forgiving as other people. It sends malevolent spirits called shadows to try to "resolve" the Wiedergänger-problem. At first these spirits are weak, just voices or moving shadows playing mind games trying to persuade the character to give up. But during the story stronger shadows may turn up, chasing the Wiedergänger, lurking around anchors, controlling people or inanimate objects or finally getting enough control to fabricate a body to harm the Wiedergänger physically.

As for game play I want the game to have a normal game master for the scenes set in the present but the flashbacks can be mastered by any player in the game (except the one that causes this flashback, because he's definitely in it), I'm still thinking about a betting mechanism or something uncomplicated.
For group-play it would be best if the anchors link the protagonists and the characters discover connections they didn't even know about (or forgot). Another way is to use group-anchors, shared by all the characters.


So I hope this is not to long but still long enough to present the main idea. Some things are set, some are still swirling in my head. I see several possible directions for Wiedergänger sessions. For example stories about revenge like the Crow comics or very emotional and tragic stories or even ones heavy on action where a killer will make sure that you won't come back next time.

I will see if there's some first thoughts from you guys and will eventuall post some problems I have with the game-designing

[Troy_Costisick]

Heya,

I just wanted to give you my initial reactions to your post.  First, Wiedergänger is an awesome name!  I love it.  Second, I want to talk about the mechanics of your game. I see several things:

-First, you have a Discovery Mechanic, where the Player Character (PC) tries to learn what happened.

-Second, you have a Countdown (Timer) Mechanic telling the player how much longer he'll get to play that character.

-Third, a Character Creation mechanic involving Anchors.

-Fourth, a Conflict Resolution Mechanic that involves Flashbacks and Anchors.  This looks like it might have several different mechanics working at the same time.

-Fifth, a Character Advancement Mechanic that makes the character physically weaker but supernaturally more powerful.

-Sixth, an escalating NPC mechanic involving the shadows controlled by the GM.
Seventh, a rotating GM mechanic.

Ok.  Let me see if I have correct how all of these different mechanics are related to each other.  The Discovery Mechanic is tied to the Conflict Resolution Mechanic.  That is to say, that when a PC wants to discover something, he has to fight for it somehow.  This involves a Flashback.  Let me ask, who initiates the Flashback- the GM or the Players?  What does the character and player have to do in order to win the conflict and gain information from the Flashback?  What happens if he loses?

When it comes to anchors, how many does each character get?  Is there an incentive for choosing a lot or choosing a few?

I also see that the countdown mechanic and the character advancement mechanic are tied together.  I like how as the character gets weaker, he gains supernatural powers.  How do those powers help him?  Does he get to use them during a Flashback?

I really like how the Shadows start weak and end strong.  How does your game accomplish this?  What tools do you give the GM so he can make that happen for the players?  Does he get a point for every point of Soul the characters lose?

Finally, about the changing GM mechanic.  That might be hard for you to make work correctly.  Let me make a suggestion.  If a Flashback involves another player's character, then that player gets to be the GM for that scene.  If the Flashback does not involve another player's character, then the normal GM gets to be the GM.  Also, you could require each Flashback to include another player's character if you wanted.

I hope these suggestions help.  I like your game idea.

Peace,

-Troy

[neph]

Argh, I was writing a reply for 30 minutes and then it crashed, okay once again:

Ok.  Let me see if I have correct how all of these different mechanics are related to each other.  The Discovery Mechanic is tied to the Conflict Resolution Mechanic.  That is to say, that when a PC wants to discover something, he has to fight for it somehow.  This involves a Flashback.  Let me ask, who initiates the Flashback- the GM or the Players?  What does the character and player have to do in order to win the conflict and gain information from the Flashback?  What happens if he loses?

So far anybody but the players of the character that has the flashback can initiate one. But as your last answer goes in the same direction I'll try to answer it there.
Flashback conflicts were one of the more problematic points. So far I want the flashback-conflicts to be about the emotions bound to the anchor. You can get special rewards if you get to chance that emotion after the flashback (for example from "Wife (love) 3" to "Wife (distrust) 2").
Another idea was to set the solution up like a puzzle. Every "won" flashback is another step towards your absolution, every "failed" flashbacks leaves you with a missing piece in the puzzle. So in the end it's up to the number of "won" flashbacks if you can be sure what your problem really is. This way it would be possible for a Wiedergänger to try to do the right thing but actually make it worse and to realize this just as your soul is being torn apart.

When it comes to anchors, how many does each character get?  Is there an incentive for choosing a lot or choosing a few?

This depends on three factors. 1) How many players are there? 2) How long is the whole game supposed to last, a one-shot or a campaing? 3) How much scenes are supposed to be flashbacks and how many will be set in the present?
I won't give you numbers right now because I hope to get some insight in some playtest, but I think 2 points in Anchors could already be more than enough for a oneshot with 3 players.

I also see that the countdown mechanic and the character advancement mechanic are tied together.  I like how as the character gets weaker, he gains supernatural powers.  How do those powers help him?  Does he get to use them during a Flashback?

I want these flashbacks to be a pure recollection so no using the powers in these flashbacks, you are still flesh and blood back then. The powers are supposed to be helping the characters in solving their problem. For a action or revenge game it could be real superpowers, for a tragic game it could be the ability to let your widow see you for one last goodbye and for an undead-game it could be the ability to spook someone.

I really like how the Shadows start weak and end strong.  How does your game accomplish this?  What tools do you give the GM so he can make that happen for the players?  Does he get a point for every point of Soul the characters lose?

Shadow strength was supposed to tie into the remaining soul points, but actually giving spent soul points to the GM for "buying" shadows is a brilliant and simple idea. I'll definetly use this.
"Failed" flashbacks could even give some more power to the shadows because the soul gets weaker but the charakter gets no new insights or assurance that can compensate for lost strength.

Finally, about the changing GM mechanic. That might be hard for you to make work correctly.  Let me make a suggestion.  If a Flashback involves another player's character, then that player gets to be the GM for that scene.  If the Flashback does not involve another player's character, then the normal GM gets to be the GM.  Also, you could require each Flashback to include another player's character if you wanted.

Yes, how do you make players "want" to set up flashbacks? I like your idea. If a player gets to set up a flashback he can use it to point to one of his anchors, and so set up the way to his absolution. This could be a subtle but effective way to get players to call for flashbacks, because at the end when the counter is ticking they might want to know as much as possible to do the right thing. I'll playtest it.

I hope these suggestions help.  I like your game idea.

They just brought me further than the whole last week of hard thinking about some of these problems, so thanks a lot!

Andreas

[Troy_Costisick]

Heya,

They just brought me further than the whole last week of hard thinking about some of these problems, so thanks a lot!

-Good, I am glad they were helpful.  Playtesting will tell you a lot about how all these different mechanics will work.  I look forward to reading a playtesting report in the Playtesting forum in the future.  I believe you have a very good game idea.  Good luck!

Pease,

-Troy

[neph]

I'm now thinking about making the emotion the center of a flashback conflict.
The emotion listed on the charakter sheet is the one the charakter had about that anchor.
But the idea behind the game is that something went wrong so in the flashbacks the character encounters the things his death made him forget (for a reason?).
So there must be some kind of revelation in these flashback conflicts. So while I said I wanted to give special reward if the emotion changes after a flashback I'm now thinking about making it the goal of the conflict to get a new impression. This would definitely put some twists in the story.

But this way it's the same old problem for me: Putting emotions into rules...

Andreas

[David Artman]

I really like how the Shadows start weak and end strong.  How does your game accomplish this?  What tools do you give the GM so he can make that happen for the players?  Does he get a point for every point of Soul the characters lose?

Shadow strength was supposed to tie into the remaining soul points, but actually giving spent soul points to the GM for "buying" shadows is a brilliant and simple idea. I'll definitely use this.
"Failed" flashbacks could even give some more power to the shadows because the soul gets weaker but the character gets no new insights or assurance that can compensate for lost strength.

Damn! This was the first idea I had, after reading: let each lost Soul point become a GM Shadow point.

Perhaps you could add a bit more "nuance" to it by saying that an actual Shadow Being doesn't come completely form until a character burns the LAST Soul point in a given Anchor/relationship. This has two neat effects:
1) It makes it so that a character with several separate Anchors will accumulate more individual Shadow Beings to harass and eventually attack him. But, if the number of Anchors or total Soul points are limited, the Shadow Beings would be weaker, but numerous. Likewise, if a player has one or two very strong Anchors (and Soul points are limited or fixed), when one Anchor's Soul points are used up, its Shadow Being will be a SERIOUS bastard.
2) It reminds me of how Gravelings are born, in the TV show Dead Like Me.

By the way, if you haven't seen Dead Like Me, go ahead and find a download of some of the first season (or be a good guy and buy the DVDs of the two seasons). I consider it one of the best drama/comedies on TV since M*A*S*H--and that's sayin' something, in my humble opinion. It's about a team of grim reapers who all have some tie to life they must resolve, to move on (sound familiar?).

In fact, with a bit of a tweak--mainly, having the characters directed by a "grim manager" who sends them on daily reaps of souls--you could call this The Dead Like Me RPG. ;-)

You have a solid foundation; I look forward to watching you explain (resolve?) the interplay of systems;
David

[David Artman]

Missed one....

So there must be some kind of revelation in these flashback conflicts. So while I said I wanted to give special reward if the emotion changes after a flashback I'm now thinking about making it the goal of the conflict to get a new impression. This would definitely put some twists in the story.

So think it through: you have a Soul point tied to an Anchor, which has an Emotion.
During one stage of play (let's call it a "scene," as it might not all be flashbacks--see Dead Like Me), a player can lose a Soul point on that Anchor, which becomes a Shadow point for that Anchor's Graveling (Shadow Being).
And a "failed" scene can cause that Shadow point to be doubled.
...so what makes sense, in light of all that...?

Seems to me that one will need the Emotion to be turned, changed, undermined, or otherwise weakened. The Emotion is the "fuel" for the Anchor, which is the "fuel" for Soul. And the game is about whether your Soul "burns out" before you "resolve" the Anchors.

I think a cool angle would be to treat a scene as an almost competitive element of play: the player wants to resolve the scene by only generating one Shadow point when they lose the one Soul point; other players (if they want to "win") would try to twist the scene into one where the Emotion severely backlashes, rather than just fades away. ...and emotions ALL have counterpoints:
* A successful scene resolution for a Love Anchor would be acceptance of loss, betrayal, or lack of reciprocity of feelings.
* A failed scene resolution for a Love Anchor would be a shift to Hate because of betrayal, loss, or lack of reciprocal feelings.

Basically, rather than a hard mechanic, perhaps you could let both the player's choice of "how to spin it" and the opposition's choices about "what to throw at him" work towards a scene resolution that just flows from moment to moment. At the scene's conclusion, a simple voting mechanic might be enough to judge it a failure or success (i.e. 2 or 1 Shadow point for the GM). Hmmm... or perhaps one could even have a "critical success" scene in which a Soul point is lost without any commensurate Shadow point gain for the GM:
* A critically successful scene resolution for a Love Anchor would be to love the person even more, after learning of a betrayal, loss, or lack of returned feelings. (Like, maybe, the Colonel in Battlestar Galactica, after poising his wife for committing treason.)

And, finally, this leads neatly to the way to determine if a particular player's character has "resolved" all Anchors or has failed and is "doomed" (or whatever--doesn't "win"). Come up with a reasonable Success Ratio of ending Shadow point :: starting Soul points, and those players whose final ratios of ending Shadow :: starting Soul are less the Success Ratio have "ascended"; those with higher final ratios have "failed" and do not "ascend". (Or whatever: it's a victory condition; call it what you will).

And a REALLY cool thing is that the group could decide how bleak or cheery a game they want to run, by setting the Success Ratio higher or lower--high Success Ratios make for "easier" games (more Shadow can accumulate) while low Success Ratio games make for "harder" games (as one can't accumulate as many Shadow and still remain below the Success Ratio). A super-hard game would require a final ratio of less than one (final Shadow < starting Soul)!

Okay, NOW, I'm done... awaiting your follow-ups!
David

[dindenver]

Hi!
  OK, I think this game has a lot of promise, it shines from the inside with awesomeness.
  The one thing that I am trying to puzzle out, is the whole Wiederganger/Shadow dichotomy:
1) Shadows want the Wiederganger to give up, what happens if they say, "OK, I give up"?
2) Shadows represent a nuisance at the beginning and a threat at the end, how? Is it because their powers only operate on a physical level or is it because they are immune to the spiritual powers that the Wiederganger devlops
3) Do you realize that the optimal strategy for a Shadow is to guide the Wiederganger to  solve their Anchors and then ambush them at the end?
4) Do you realize that the optimal strategy for a Shadow could amount to suicide (maybe this is the answer to the 'give up' question)? If the Shadow only exists because the Wiederganger does, then when the Wiederganger completely dissipates, won't the Shadow?
  Well, as you can see, your game fascinates me. And I can't stop thinking about the cosmology and scenarios that this game would generate. Good luck and keep up the good work.

[TroyLovesRPG]

Hello Andreas,

I think this is very interesting. It reminds me of many movies with the "What's death?" theme. Flatliners, Sixth Sense, Jacob's Ladder, Ghost, The Frighteners and even Casper

That people die and retain a physical form helps game play. I see three things that are central to the game.
1. Resolution
2. Acceptance
3. Corruption

1. Resolution. The characters must resolve something in life but ran out of time. Now it is up to them to figure out what the task was and make it happen. Completion of the task redeems the character, for that is their last chance for a peaceful afterlife.
2. Acceptance. I would think its disturbing to walk around and people don't acknowledge you. So, maybe they don't know they're dead. They begin to fit the pieces together; however, this knowledge shortens their time to complete the task as their sanity and reality collapse.
3. Corruption. The character wants to complete the task, but begins to shed the mundane facade of life and experiences the personal power of the supernatural. Becoming a ghost in this world makes you lose sight of your task, forcing you to remain here as a spiteful entity. At that point, you are under the GM's control and actively seek to keep others from their tasks.

The shadow, as I see it, is the consciousness of the character, separated from the body and wants the rest of the soul/spirit to cross over. As a "voice in the head", its whispers, calls and reveals clues to complete the task. As the character remains in this world, the shadow gets impatient, anxious and angry. Eventually, it is a constant torment to the undead creature, unable to be complete.

Troy

[neph]

Thinking hard, so I begin with answering the few questions:

Shadows want the Wiederganger to give up, what happens if they say, "OK, I give up"?

The soul dissolves. I never wanted "Heaven & Hell" or any similiar concept to appear in this game so I thought about a good punishment for failing characters but actually didn't come up with anything better than "..or your soul will be painfully torn apart at it's seams" but actually that might not be a bad choice for someone who's already dead. So if you ask me what keeps the soul going I'm not entirely sure about that myself at that point. i thought about "you become a corporeal shadow and control goes over to the gamemaster who can use you against the other characters.
But actually if a player wants to give up, it should be a great dramatic final of a story without a happy end. As long as the soul has some power left it's trying to keep on trying.

Shadows represent a nuisance at the beginning and a threat at the end, how? Is it because their powers only operate on a physical level or is it because they are immune to the spiritual powers that the Wiederganger devlops

The Shadows start with mindgames, voices in the head, false advise and such. They become stronger as the soul gets weaker thus they have to somehow feed on this. I'm thinking about tying the Shadows to the emotions so you can set up certain patterns of appearance and behaviour. If they get stronger they can cause some physical effects, throwing objects at the character or things like these. If I say the shadow can become "corporeal" with the last soulpoint he can become the timer instead being tied into the timer mechanism. If he appears the character is in some serious trouble because the shadow can be temporarily stopped but not killed.

Do you realize that the optimal strategy for a Shadow is to guide the Wiederganger to  solve their Anchors and then ambush them at the end? Do you realize that the optimal strategy for a Shadow could amount to suicide (maybe this is the answer to the 'give up' question)? If the Shadow only exists because the Wiederganger does, then when the Wiederganger completely dissipates, won't the Shadow?

Shadows were originally never supposed to be rational beings (or even "beings" at all). More like malevolent spirits which haunt the character. They don't plan ahead or set up ambushes. Originally in the first idea I wanted them to be personified forces of reality which wants to get rid of the Wiedegänger nuisance as fast as possible.
Later when I thought about tying them into the countdown mechanism and making them stronger over time they became something different.

Setting up a shadow for every anchor (that feeds on the emotion of that anchor ans acutally uses exactly this emotion against the characer) makes them far more personal and intimate foes, which seems like a very good idea to me.

[neph]

Seems to me that one will need the Emotion to be turned, changed, undermined, or otherwise weakened. The Emotion is the "fuel" for the Anchor, which is the "fuel" for Soul. And the game is about whether your Soul "burns out" before you "resolve" the Anchors.

I think a cool angle would be to treat a scene as an almost competitive element of play: the player wants to resolve the scene by only generating one Shadow point when they lose the one Soul point; other players (if they want to "win") would try to twist the scene into one where the Emotion severely backlashes, rather than just fades away. ...and emotions ALL have counterpoints:
* A successful scene resolution for a Love Anchor would be acceptance of loss, betrayal, or lack of reciprocity of feelings.
* A failed scene resolution for a Love Anchor would be a shift to Hate because of betrayal, loss, or lack of reciprocal feelings.

Basically, rather than a hard mechanic, perhaps you could let both the player's choice of "how to spin it" and the opposition's choices about "what to throw at him" work towards a scene resolution that just flows from moment to moment. At the scene's conclusion, a simple voting mechanic might be enough to judge it a failure or success (i.e. 2 or 1 Shadow point for the GM). Hmmm... or perhaps one could even have a "critical success" scene in which a Soul point is lost without any commensurate Shadow point gain for the GM:
* A critically successful scene resolution for a Love Anchor would be to love the person even more, after learning of a betrayal, loss, or lack of returned feelings. (Like, maybe, the Colonel in Battlestar Galactica, after poising his wife for committing treason.)

That pretty well summarizes what I had in mind with some neat little extras put in (and better phrased).

And, finally, this leads neatly to the way to determine if a particular player's character has "resolved" all Anchors or has failed and is "doomed" (or whatever--doesn't "win"). Come up with a reasonable Success Ratio of ending Shadow point :: starting Soul points, and those players whose final ratios of ending Shadow :: starting Soul are less the Success Ratio have "ascended"; those with higher final ratios have "failed" and do not "ascend". (Or whatever: it's a victory condition; call it what you will).
And a REALLY cool thing is that the group could decide how bleak or cheery a game they want to run, by setting the Success Ratio higher or lower--high Success Ratios make for "easier" games (more Shadow can accumulate) while low Success Ratio games make for "harder" games (as one can't accumulate as many Shadow and still remain below the Success Ratio). A super-hard game would require a final ratio of less than one (final Shadow < starting Soul)!

Very mechanical for my current state of mind (still more worried if it all makes sense in the bigger picture) but that could work. I guess setting up the rules for these conflicts will cause me some headaches in the future.
But I will set up some playtests without using any special "resolution mechanism" so voting might be a good placeholder.

OK, I think this game has a lot of promise, it shines from the inside with awesomeness.

Thank you, I would never have believed how much motivation sentences like this one can give you...

[neph]

2. Acceptance
3. Corruption

Points 2 and 3 were even more present in the the concept at first, when I wanted to include the "Men vs. Beast" topic. in the beginning you are freshly dead and still see yourself as a human. With more time and weakening power you realize more and more that you are not human but a monstrous abomination which is not supposed to walk the earth. you could become even more of  a monster by becoming more powerful, so itall came down to the question: "What are you willing to do, to save your soul?"
But right now I don't see how this would tie into the other parts of the system, so I'll leave that out of the main concept at the moment keeping it as an option for a certain style of play.

[neph]

I talked to a friend about a playtest and when we talked about the game we came up with a little problem:
I see two major centerparts of this game. 1) Learning about what went wrong in the flashbacks. 2) Correctig these wrongs. So both situations should involve the conflicts which lead to success or failure. 2) plays more or less like a conventional game, but 1) causes me some headaches:

But what does the character/player want in a flashback-conflict?

Death made the character loose some memories because of some traumatic events in them leading to his death. This could just be story-elements but I think there really needs to be a conflict in these flashbacks. I have ideas for some flashbacks but I have to put it somehow generally.

I wanted to use the emotions bound to a flashback via it's anchor as the conflict-hook. The emotion is the one the character remembers concering this anchor, so it's the one being questioned in the flashback. (To use the same example: You still think you love your wife, but actually death made you forget this little episode where you found out about her affair.)
So what does the character want? Does he want to keep that emotion because it's very dear to him (he wins the conflict if he can supress his suspicions and keep on trusting his wife after the flashback) or does he want the new discovery because it brings him closer to the truth (he wins if he can see through his wife's lies and finds out that she had an affair with anchor X).

[David Artman]

So what does the character want? Does he want to keep that emotion because it's very dear to him (he wins the conflict if he can suppress his suspicions and keep on trusting his wife after the flashback) or does he want the new discovery because it brings him closer to the truth (he wins if he can see through his wife's lies and finds out that she had an affair with anchor X).

Why make it one or the other? From my "system" above, a player could:
a) increase his character's feelings of love, even in face of betrayal (lose a Soul point without engendering a Shadow point).
b) lose a bit of love, and make a bit of shadow (lose a Soul point and engender a Shadow point).
c) Feel that love start to warp into hate, to his woe (lose a Soul point and engender TWO Shadow points).

What remains, then, is not to mechanically force one and only one of those outcomes. Rather, you need a negotiation, bidding, trumps, or some other system to apportion narrative credability/control; and then that system, in turn, would lead the players to resolve how a particular scene (flashback or NOT) plays out both in terms of Soul/Shadow loss/gain and in terms of basic narrative events (for example, who injects the "fact" that the wife was a betrayer; or who controls how the husband character will eventually respond to that fact?).

By the way, have you given thought to group cohesion? In games like this (where each person is trying to get their own individual scene) it's good to have some means by which the players can inter-relate their PCs. Anything that can draw more than one character into the scene is a Good Thing®, as it keeps the others from twiddling their thumbs or becoming disruptive. Perhaps your credability system will pull all players into all scenes (as NPCs, "forces of fate" or even as Shadow Beings), and that would work fine for many sessions. But I think you'd really benefit from a means by which players could intentionally intertwine their PCs, mechanically (systemically) as well as narratively. And you REALLY want something better than "we know each other from life" or likewise--the classic (and lame) "Inn of Bonhomie" syndrome, where the PCs are together "just because" and not due to meaningful, pregnant, drama-laden relationships.

David