Minimalism,color, and Pre-existing Settings

[komradebob]

Basically, I want to use Uni as my primary system. I want to use it with settings from other games (Primarily Jorune). Now, I've already seen some discussions of bringing other game settings into a Uni session. So far so good. What I'm really looking for is advice from other people with Uni +premade setting experience, in particular in how it interacts with color.

Huh?

Example:
Goal
I want to encourage minimalist play, especially so players can spend their coins on complications, etc, to carry the story along. I also would prefer to keep dice rolling to a limited amount ( ie,. not buckets of dice thrown in complications).

To expand my example, I'm playing, say, old AD&D inspired fantasy. I introduce a character, Rolf[1]: Dwarf[1]warrior[1].

So far, so good. The players agree that, since AD&D is the inspiration for our collective vision of what a Dwarf is, no master components with traits are necessary. If our pal Rolf is involved in a scene, he may get a die for anything that the pre-existing color suggests a Dwarf would be good at, although not multiple dice inherently, because the Dwarf trait is only one trait.

Okay, what if being a Dwarf could be both good and bad in a given complication?
In this case, I'm using some body of pre-existing literature as the color basis for the trait Dwarf.

Anyone have thoughts on how to handle this?
Is their any importance to who "activates" the trait Dwarf in determining whether it is good or bad in a given complication?
Does the "color" attached to Dwarf, being possibly both positive and negative for a complication negate anyone utilising the die for the complication, or could both sides use the die, even though Dwarf is only one trait?

In game situation to illustrate question:
Preexisting color suggests that:
1) Dwarves are skilled in situations involving business negotiations.
2) Dwarves and Elves have some mutual animosity toward one another in social settings.

Rolf is dealing with an Elf in a business setting, say attempting to open a trade route.

[Mike Holmes]

The relevant problem seems to be this:

Is their any importance to who "activates" the trait Dwarf in determining whether it is good or bad in a given complication?

Yes it most assuredly does. When a player activates a trait, that player indicates what pool it goes into. The other players then can Challenge if they think it's wrong. Simple as that. So, for example, if a Dwarf was trading for something, someone might activate it saying, "Dwarfs like they're gold so he'd be more able to haggle well." But then another player might Challenge, "Sure, that's true, but in this case, the Dwarf's gruffness would cancel that advantage out." If the Challenge flies, then the die gets taken back.

Another method that I've seen is to allow traits to be activated on both sides of a contest. That's inflationary, because it means that each trait can produce two dice per conflict, but, with challenges, it can be used responsibly. If using this rule, then each of the players would activate the trait and add a die to their pool.

Mike

[kwill]

a situation such as you describe might also be a good time to spend a coin on a Trait, determining what it is that makes this Dwarven Warrior different from all the others

is he honey-tongued? greedy? good with Elves (for a Dwarf)? got a bad attitude?

throw a Trait in and decide which side it falls

(and you might agree, perhaps as a Tenet, not to throw in such Traits until these kind of events occur)