Le Mon Mouri Questions

[jrs]

As mentioned in the http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=5339" target="_blank" class="postlink">Two [censored] at once! thread, we've played two sessions of Le Mon Mouri.  I've been wanting to play Le Mon Mouri since Ron shoved the rules into my hands and said read this -  not only am I finally playing, I'm cutting my GM'ing teeth with this game.  

We've come up with several questions about play that I hope Sean or anyone else who has played Le Mon Mouri could help clarify.

1. Target numbers for opposed conflicts. Here's how we do it. Sebastienne is attacking Lyonette in a Ti-Bon-Ange conflict; the former has TBA 4 and the latter has TBA 6. This means that both characters roll TBA with a target number of 8 (the target's TBA + 2). Whover gets the least successes will take the differences in successes as damage to TBA.

If, say, Sebastienne loses by one success, her TBA drops to 3. Then Lyonette retaliates with a similar attack, with her TBA of 6 against Sebastienne's new value of 3. This time, the target number for both characters is 5, as 3 + 2 = 5.

This interpretation works very well, as far as we can tell. Note that if you are attacking someone whose targeted Aspe is 0, the target number for both rolls is 2 by our interpretation. (To complete this picture, as stated in the rules, they roll dice equal to another Aspe but must discard the two highest values and lose twice the normal dice.)

The problem is that this approach is not validated by the combat example in the book; the value of the target number is not stated in the example.  I question our assumptions here because we're assuming that the target number is 2 (the defender's targeted Aspe is 0), but then it's unclear why in the example the attacker only gains two rather than three successes with a roll of 8, 9, and 2.  (Earlier in the rules, a success is defined as meeting or exceeding a target number.)

2. The rule regarding fleeing if 3 or more dice are lost in any Aspe - does this refer to a single conflict roll that results in the loss of 3 dice or does it refer to 3 dice lost over an extended combat scene?

3. How is order of action/announcement handled for complex group conflicts? Say five characters are all twittering petty gossip, insults, and/or support among one another at once. What sets the order for who "goes" when? What sets the order for whose sallies "land" when? Please, please don't put in an "initiative" mechanic; the existing attributes and rolls ought to contain enough information, in my opinion.  [That's Ron speaking in the last sentence.]

4. How would you handle the successes and Aspe-subtraction consequences when several Sans-Souf cooperate on a single Travay?

5. The paragraph for recovering Aspe that have been brought to 0 is completely opaque. Why roll? Roll what? Fail on what? Can you give a complete example, including the role-playing as well as the rolls?  It seems that the only way to even begin to recover Aspe once it reaches 0 is by first sacrificing dice, is this correct?

6. Is there a time limit for "reversion" of an Aspe Transfer? We are playing that they simply shift over and stay there.  

7.  Can Aspe recovery rolls be used to regain sacrificed or transferred dice?

8. How long is a span? Is it an in-game unit or a "whatever" unit?

9. The Hunt is never described - we assume it's hunting Respire, but where? How? How formalized? Any time? Designated or acceptable targets? Is it an in-setting term? Can a group of messed-up Sans-Souf who take down and devour a Respire in an alley be said to be "Hunting," or is that too general an interpretation?

10. Since the character creation of Respire does not require values in Gros-Mal-Ange or Grangou, can we assume that the rule regarding complete loss of GMA or Grangou only refers to Respire who had dice in these Aspes?

Julie

[sdemory]

Hey there,
   First and foremost, thanks for ruining your future GMing by starting out with Le Mon Mouri. I'll do my level best to address each of your questions with ruthless efficiency and no small amount of chagrin:
1) Good call and quite correct on the combat. Thomas should have gotten three successes, rather than two... I was working off of an outmoded target number.
2) Losing three points in an Aspe over time inspires the flight response.
3) Order of action is, largely, based on Aspe level; those with higher scores go first. It should be modified, though, based on complexity of action. I was shooting for a relatively free-form system, so I suffer from more than a wee bit of hand-waving vagueness there.
4) I'd tend to combine the characters' Aspe scores and split the lost Aspe equally between the group. I'd also create some troubling in-game effects from that degree of connection.
5) The need to roll came about due to a degree of second-guessing bastardy on my part. I didn't want players to start trading in dice to boost their Aspe; in the long run, that's a mug's game but gamers are known for falling prey to mug's games.
   One rolls a standard roll (difficulty 7) with the dice pool of the sacrificial Aspe (if you're transferring Ti-Bon-Ange to Gros-Mal-Ange, roll Ti-Bon-Ange and meet or beat 7). Within the game logic, the roll's a survival mechanism within the individual Aspe, an effort to retain potency without consideration for the consequences to the San-Souf as a whole.
6) There is no time limit whatsoever. At one point, I was looking at some sort of decay mechanic to address the transfer of Aspe, but characters shift so quickly that it's really not necessary.
7) Yes, they can. It creates the potential for game imbalance but the give and take of the three Aspe tends to curb the worse of it.
8) A "span" is an entirely arbitrary unit, and it's vital that the characters, as well as the players, see it as such. IT's the length of a scene, whether that scene's an extended parlor drama or a brief, jarring moment of unspeakable violence. Of course, parlor dramas can involve brief, jarring moments of unspeakable violence and often do.
9) Hunting's not necessarily just hunting Respire. It can be hunting weaker Sans-Souf, what few animals exist on Il Danye Chans or anything else that can be tracked, brought down and eaten. Respire are just tastier than most other things one can hunt.
   I do realize that this offers two opportunities for an enterprising San-Souf to gain Grangou. That potential source of imbalance is built into the system.
10) Your assumption is correct, although it's not too likely that you'll have a Respire who's entirely devoid of GMA or Grangou.

   Looking forward to more on your game. Thanks so much for giving it a try.

Sean

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Sean,

Two things.

ONE
Regarding #5, I'm still very confused. We're not talking about transferring Aspe at all; we're talking about recovering dice to an Aspe that was reduced to 0.

Let's take my character, Sebastienne. Let's say a fight goes badly and she's reduced to 0 in her Grangou. Her Ti-Bon-Ange is 4 and her Gros-Mal-Ange is 6.

What do I do? Please lay it out for me in very, very small steps, especially the parts that you think are obvious. Bear in mind that I am not talking about transfer of any kind, just recovery.

TWO
I think that Transfer of Aspe (as Thomas Cold did in the text example) should not be considered damage of any kind, just rearrangement. In other words, I don't think that the Aspe that was lessened should be recoverable. It might be transferred back, I suppose, but that's just more transferring.

Best,
Ron

[sdemory]

Ron,

   Hitting both of your issues, which are more than a bit muddy in the text (I see yet another version in the works):
1) If Sebastienne is reduced to 0 Grangou, she is in something of a spot. To prime the pump, so to speak, she's got to feed two dice from another pool to Grangou to recover one die. She'd have a choice between her less-robust Ti-Bon-Ange (4 dice) and her hearty Gros-Mal-Ange (6 dice).
   At this point, the choice is difficult. You're effectively "attacking" one of the Aspe to start Grangou back up. If you choose Ti-Bon-Ange, it's less likely to be able to defend (by rolling 7)... but it'll mean losing half of your Ti-Bon-Ange pool. On the other hand, losing Gros-Mal-Ange would be simultaneously less jarring and more difficult.

2) I'm torn as far as recovery of transferred Aspe goes. On the one hand, I like the thought of everything one does causing damage in some sense. On the other hand, an unscrupulous person could do some damage that way. Until the next edition comes out (GenCon, perhaps?), I'll consider transfers to not be damage. Good call, Mr. Edwards.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Sean,

Wait wait, you're doin' it again - leaving stuff out. You write,

she's got to feed two dice from another pool to Grangou to recover one die.

OK, but apparently, I can't "just do that" and continue play. There's a roll involved. I understand that it'll be a difficult roll if I use the (big) GMA and a less difficult roll if I use the (smaller) TBA. I also understand that I'd be rolling their respective pools (GMA = 6; TBA = 4).

But in either case, what do I roll the relevant score against?

Also, after all this, and assuming I succeed ('cause you damn betcha I'll be spending Fre if it makes a difference), does this mean that my character Aspe total just dropped to 12? Seems like it. It also seems that this is a permanent condition. So no matter what, every time an Aspe is driven to 0 for any reason, you're going to have a net loss of 1 Aspe?

Best,
Ron

[sdemory]

Blame my three-day Dayquil bender... I'm punchy as hell, alas.
   Fail an uncontested roll (standard difficulty of seven) to transfer the points across. You're hoping that your "defending" Aspe loses, basically, so you can make the transfer.

[jrs]

Fail an uncontested roll (standard difficulty of seven) to transfer the points across. You're hoping that your "defending" Aspe loses, basically, so you can make the transfer.

Hmmm.  I'm missing something here.  What prevents the player from continually rolling until the dice land as desired?  Is the character accruing feb for any 2 or more successes even though its an uncontested roll?

Why not just permit a straight sacrifice - it would seem to carry a sufficient penalty, i.e., fewer total dice for the character.  

Julie

[Ron Edwards]

Arrrrghhh! This is exactly the problem.

There I am. I have Grangou 0 (ouch!) and I decide to nab two dice from my Gros Mal Ange.

I roll the six dice from the GMA, fine. What do you mean by fail the roll? Get nothing equal to 7 or above?

If so, I suggest that the recovery-from-0 rules are way, way skewed toward the impossible end of the range. Doing this even with the TBA (four dice) would be very unlikely.

Best,
Ron

[sdemory]

It is, indeed, heavily skewed. In practice, people have ended up using their Fre (which become, at base, get-out-of-jail-free cards) to get back on the road to recovery... which, thinking about it, makes sense and works well with the way the Fre is recovered. I may just use Fre as the jump-start.
   [Edit begins here... I know that the rules set the Fre as success on all dice with no Feb, but that strikes me as somewhat limiting. Rather than that, the next edition will declare use of Fre as achieving one's desired outcome from a roll rather than instant 10s.]
  Part of the logic may stem from my pathetic dice-rolling. I could easily, easily roll four ten-sided dice and come up with no successes (as my players saw during my last Adventure game when I rolled 20 ten-sided dice and failed miserably). Still, it's primarily an effort to simulate that internal conflict and predation. Any thoughts as to how to strike a balance between idea and playability?

Edited to address Fre changes... curse you, Dayquil, you make my mind foggy!

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Sean,

Ah ha! That is a big, big change in Fre.

When I read the earlier version of the rules, and when I (very carefully) read the current version, I originally thought that Fre was a "succeed in this conflict" mechanic. But then, more recently and in prep for the current game, we realized it was an "as many 10's as you want" mechanic. That has its cool aspects, but it also makes Aspe recovery a hell of a lot harder even with Fre.

But this new interpretation kind of puts the probabilities back where I'd (wrongly) thought them to be. All set!

In answer to your question:Eliminate the "transfer points by losing the Aspe" roll for the recovery of Aspe from 0 and replace it with a mechanic that utilizes the existing system in full. The existing rule is a very good example of an obvious patch-rule that works 180-degrees from every other roll in the book, and it's clearly gumming up both game function and reader-understanding.

Best,
Ron