[HeroQuest] Fields of Freedom

[Mike Holmes]

Nope, at the risk of sounding critical, he dropped the ball on this one. Granted, she could have said more, but she tried twice, got no response and gave up.

Ok, I suck. Talked to Wen and that wasn't the case at all. She said she loved it and understood that Matt has split focus going on.

See, that's what happens when I try to be insightful.
Blah. Sue me! ;)

Fascinating.

Do you think that it's possible that you were projecting a tad? That is, perhaps it's you who wanted to see certain things happen with her character that got "missed"?

Did you say anything about it when the opportunity was passing? I'm guessing not? Why?

Mike

[Mike Holmes]

Note this is my third post in a row here, please don't miss the above two...

On the ammounts for players to give as rewards: Inky, the problem is solved by a couple of things. First, give only one (or, like you suggested, have people split up the two). Second, give more HP, generally. That is, 4 HP only looks like a lot when the normal reward is 4 HP. If the normal reward is 8, then 4 isn't out of proportion.

Further, how many times did you try this. The "problem" only will occur on those occasions where one player was truely outstanding. There will, presumably be times where this is not the case. As narrator, also, you can try to focus on players who've not gotten rewards in the past under the assumption that maybe they aren't getting enough chance to shine.

Lastly, don't make the reward for "best scene" or anything like that. Instead make it "One HP to any player for any reason you want to state." That way, I can give the slow player a HP just because I like them coming to play. Or whatever. This way, you get broader feedback, less focus on single events, and the HP are likely to get spread around - people like me will be giving them to the underdogs just for trying hard, etc.

Because the point is correct, above. If you're really creating a meritocracy, then you'll get stacks on one player. If you're merely trying to create a method for players to interact with each other and communicate, then don't make the award for "best."

Mike

[Brand_Robins]

Ok, I suck. Talked to Wen and that wasn't the case at all. She said she loved it and understood that Matt has split focus going on.

Do you think that she was really alright with it though? That is to say, do you think she was alright with it at the time and had no frustrations or lessening of fun because of it, or do you think she became alright with it after the fact?

I ask because one of the mechanisms I've seen over and over again among my players is when I botch something as a GM they will often be quite upset at the moment, less upset but still mildly frustrated by the end of the game, and saying they were never upset two days later.

Part of this is attributable to some perspective, I think, as the frustrations fade with time -- which can be perfectly healthy. However, I think a large part of it is due to dysfunctional habits around game where players have trained themselves to sublimate frustrations and get over it for "the good of the group." When this leads to players who are repeatedly getting frustrated and not identifying it, accepting a lessened stake in the creative agenda then it can become a problem.

I have no way of telling which way W went, I just ask because I'm constantly trying to get a read on that issue with my own players.

[Matt Snyder]

Session Three

Session three began with a lot of good anticipation. While it didn't have the focus and intensity in conflicts like the second session, the game was enjoyable overall. Playing this session were: Flash (playing Squire Gwyn), Lisa (playing Gabrielle), Wendy (playing Asheria), and Tony (playing Bronn).

I began the session with an attentive group. So, I simply asked "Who wants to go first?" Wendy beat everyone to the punch. Her character, Asheria, was last seen as a captive of the Anduren war clan north of Haven. So, I set the scene. She awoke in the morning, feeling slightly better. She has a practice spirit called Red Bear. One of it's abilties is something like "Healing Slumber." So, we said her injuries were gone.

Guards ushered Asheria to a tent with fellow captives Gant (her step-father), Sir Krenner, and his squire. There, they faced Robat, the war clan leader.

In a dialogue exchange between Asheria and Robat, Wendy played the proud, defiant woman. Robat inquired about Prince Gildas the Stormrider -- his warclan's prince, who set out to kill her "king." Asheria reacted condescendingly to the Anduren's apparent ignorance that Lord Ganeston of Haven is a lord, not a king. But, she soon discovered their intent -- the Anduren wished to free their prince from Lord Ganeston's dungeon.

Robat made an offer. Either Asheria or Gant would be allowed to go free. Then, he or she must go to the castle and free Gildas within two days. Failure meant the Anduren would kill the other.

Once offered, I could see Wendy excitedly volunteer. She didn't miss a beat to have Asheria offer to go to the castle and free Gildas. She joked -- I many of us did -- that she had little concern for Gant's fate.

...

Next up, we introduced Tony's character, Bronn to the game. First, I'll explain his character a bit.

Here's Tony's initial concept delivered via email:

Maybe the son of a powerful nobleman barely escapes from the destruction of his house and family during a coup, and escapes to join a brotherhood of exotic assassins.  He returns home to seek vengeance against the opposing house, with no identity, as he's thought to be dead.  He sets about infiltrating the opposing house to begin taking out the house leaders.  He was once a happy, well-adjusted youth from a truly "good" house, but he's so consumed by revenge that he'll stop at nothing to see the opposing house burn.

Tony delivered that concept with relatively little knowledge of the Fields of Freedom set up. I liked the idea overall, and I quickly found a great place for him to fit in. We worked through some alterations via email, then more details just prior to this third session.

We decided that Bronn's home was destroyed years ago by the same Anduren warclan now threatening northern Haven. He was taken as a slave among the Anduren, and later sold to travelers from Kolös, an exotic theocracy infamous for its tumultuous politics and worship of the chaotic Baelith, mother spider and mistress of death and magic. Now, Bronn had returned to the warclan and killed one of its members, the first in his plan for revenge against the clan.

Tony created a magical keyword involving a spider cult to tie with his upbringing in an assassin's coven. His abilities are neat ideas! He has "Faces of Death" ability, which lets him assume the guise of anyone he murders. He also has an ability that lets him commune with those he kills, so long as he has some talisman from their corpse (teeth, lock of hair, etc.)

So, with that, I decided that Tony's character was one of the two assassin-bandits captured at the end of session two. The other was Prince  Gildas, whom Tony was trying to kill. He had disguised himself magically as "Finn," a comrade of Gildas' he previously killed. But, now he found himself captured along with Gildas in Lord Ganeston's dungeon.

First, I described soldiers coming to Gildas cell and taking him away for a few hours. Then, they came and took "Finn" for questioning. Tony continued to keep up his magical disguise. He began lying about their purpose in the woods, saying they were hunting. When Lord Ganeston told him that Gildas already admitted his intentions to kill the lord, Tony chuckled. He continued Finn's desperate dialogue, making up more lies.

Upon returning to his cell, Finn decided to make his move. Tony also created a magical ability called "Shadow Dancer" that lets him "leap" from shadow to shadow. (Just now writing this, I recall that HeroQuest advises against teleportation powers almost entirely; I didn't find it to be a problem.) He used the ability to escape his cell and enter Prince Gildas. There, he startled Gildas as he emerged from the shadowy corner and revealed his true face. Gildas gasped at the magical transformation, but he successfully fended off Bronn's strangling attack. (In a simple contest, Tony lost a simple contest) The guards entered the cell, and Bronn vanished into the shadows.

Tony greatly enjoyed the sinister moves of his character, but seemed a bit frustrated with die rolls. His post above in this thread explains some of that.

From there, Bronn hid out in the castle stables where he encountered Squire Gwyn. The two struck up an uneasy bargain, which I'll get too shortly ...

. . .

Squire Gwyn and his lady knight, Josianne, returned to the castle from their encounter with the war band. Josianne reported to her lord the events, but demanded that Gwyn and the other knights follow her lead or be shamed by their cowardice. She described the encounter, greatly under-representing the number of Anduren warriors to Lord Ganeston. She then volunteered to return to the camp with 4-5 knights to rescue Sir Krenner.

This set up a fun conflict for Flash's character, Gwyn. He's stuck between his loyalty to Josianne and his constant cowardice. Put on the spot by Lord Ganeston himself to vouch for her report. Flash moaned with the tension and choice, chuckled, then ultimately decided to have Gwyn go along with Josianne. Flash seems to really enjoy making these choices (there have been several in the game so far), but he also role-plays them in a way that portrays Gwyn as the clever coward (often humorously so). Gwyn went along with the story, but made a vague statement that could be taken either way. The Lord didn't question further, and he dispatched them to rescue Sir Krenner.

At this point, Bronn overheard Gwyn and other squires doubting their fate against the warclan horde. He's intrigued, and makes an offer to go with them and spot out the camp and Sir Krenner's likely whereabouts. Gwyn then convinced Josianne to bring him along.

...

Meanwhile, Gabrielle began her search for an adoptive home for Lady Thorel's baby. Lisa seemed to have a plan in mind. She also stated that she really liked this avenue of the game, because it was pregnant (excuse the pun) with future possibilities for conflict. Complication intervened, however.

I realize, now, that it may have been interesting to use simple contests, or even extended contests to have her convince the two farm wives she talked with to take the baby. But, it still worked out wonderfully.

After meeting some reluctance from the two farm wives, she visited Old Quint for advice. Lisa tied the interaction into her own character's story -- Gabrielle asked Quint how it was he decided to place her with her mother and father, and

Through the dialogue, I think we both came on to the same idea. Gabrielle asked Quint to take the baby, and he agreed so long as she would help him. "I'd need a woman around," he said – or something close to that.

Gabrielle then visited Lady Thorel and told her she had found a suitable home. Lady Thorel then asked to meet the "family." Lisa and I both got a chuckle out of this – part of the reason she had difficultly convincing the farm families to take the baby was that they wanted to meet the mother. Lisa's plans were to see that didn't happen to protect the lady's identity. So, this was me giving her a good razzing, and I think she found it humorous. We chuckled. I don't think I'd have done this to her had the idea of Quint as adoptive father come into play. I think it could have been a very frustrating thing for her, and it may have felt like rail-roading on my part.

Lady Thorel also requested that Gabrielle stay with her in the castle throughout the pregnancy, despite her father's flagging health.

I had prepared Lisa's main choice for the game, but it became a bit blurred. Originally, I was going to have her choose between Lady Thorel's need for constant help and Quint's offer of tutelage (hinting that it would be magical instruction). Quint did make the offer, but with the spontaneous idea of having him take Lady Thorel's baby, that conflict deflated. Still, the story events were surprising to me (and I think Lisa, too), and I enjoyed them very much for that reason!

...

Squire Thomas awoke one morning to tend to his usual chores – breakfast with fellow squires, daily preparations. However, he noted the absence of Sir Baldwin, his master. With his fellow squires (two others -- I decided Baldwin had three squires total, being one of the eldest knights in Haven), Thomas went to Baldwin's chambers to discover the old knight died in his sleep.

Interestingly, Dave demonstrated some mild frustration at that point. He was concerned that he'd be losing his best ability -- his relationship with Sir Baldwin. So, he showed me  his character sheet, and we came up with a pretty generous and interesting solution. Thomas has a magical ability Dave came up with called "Old Man's Eye." We had no idea what that did or meant, but he had it! So, I let him transfer the entire rating from his relationship with Baldwin to his magical ability Old Man Eye, setting the ability somewhere around 14M1 (we use M instead of W for our mastery nomenclature). He would have to cement this, but the bonus was still pretty generous, I think. I also reasoned that he's less likely to use Old Man's Eye

Thomas then reported the death of Baldwin to his father, Durmond Bleys, who is the castle steward. Durmond offered his son an opportunity. Thomas was 2nd squire to Baldwin; a squire named Dalmas is 1 year older and in line to earn knighthood with Baldwin's demise. Durmond offered to "put in a good word" with Lord Ganeston to see that Thomas earn knigthood first.

This set up an interesting moral dilemma, but one that Dave took no hesitation to make. He wanted knighthood, and had his father circumvent tradition.

...

NOTE: At this point, we had several narrative "strands" that began to converge. And, we realized that the "timeline" for each wasn't quite correct. So, we talked about it openly as a group, and decided to "edit" the timeframes so that every strand (Gwyn's rescue, Baldwin's death, and Asheria's return) converged on the same early morning.

Asheria returned from the Anduren camp, ostensibly to free Gildas. Instead, Wendy eagerly avoids Gildas altogether. She has Asheria report to Lord Ganeston that the 100+ member warband has Krenner and Gant, and it wants their prince returned.

I enjoyed that bit, because it set up a conflict for Flash and his troupe. Their under-reporting of the war clan gets them in a bit of trouble. I like it when the players are helping create such situations.

Lord Ganeston then summoned all knights, squires and common soldiers to march on the Anduren camp in the north. With all the troops arrayed, Lord Ganeston called Thomas to the fore. He had announced Baldwin's demise, then ordered Thomas to take a knee. He knighted Sir Thomas on the spot.

Dave took the opportunity to make an interesting gesture. Thomas took out his sword, which is a special possession he created during character creation (the sword's name currently escapes me -- something like Haven's Claw). Thomas grabbed the edge of the blade, cutting his hand as an oath of fealty. "To the last drop," he said. A nice little moment! Dave portrayed his character quiety, honorably.

Lisa later remarked that she thought Dave's role-playing for that oath was the best of the session, and that she thought the other players missed the subtle beauty of the moment. I think it was relatively subtle, and perhaps Dave should have earned more reaction from the players. I did enjoy the moment immensely, if not as vocally as it may have deserved...

...

With that, Bronn and Gwyn finalized their bargain. Gwyn meekly addressed Lord Ganeston to advise Bronn go along with the army north. Despite his mysterious appearance at the castle, Gwyn argued, he spoke the language and could identify the tent with Sir Krenner. I can't recall if this involved a simple contest, but I think we simply agreed through dialogue.

The army marched north. The players, then, began discussing their strategy. I recall some discussion about attack plans and concern about combat abilities. At that point, I reminded them that there was less need to be concerned about blow-by-blow tactics and combat effectiveness -- that HeroQuest abilities need not be swords and armor and riding to make this plan work.

Dave wanted to use his characters several leadership and strategy-related abilities, which was fine. They came up with an attack plan. Josianne and several knights would charge, then "retreat" to draw out many Anduren riders, and then several other knights would ambush the pursuers. Meanwhile, Thomas and others would lead a second, stealthier charge into the camp to rescue Krenner, Gant, and the squire. Asheria also snuck into the camp, as did Bronn with his shadow dancing abilities.

Thus began the session's only extended contest. I divided the camp into two sections/AP pools, then had a third AP pool for Robat, the warclan leader.

For the contest, I asked for AP bids, then let the highest bid go (including my own bids, which ended up being lower almost every time than those risk-taking players!). The players seemed to get the hang of it all a bit more. Here's what happened:

Gwyn's part was to lure out the Anduren. I simply let his roll, with some support from Josianne's abilities to represent the charging knights, stand for the action. Flash again used his "Weasel's Luck" ability. With successful rolls, he whittled down the attacking Anduren. I described the luck as clouds blotting out the moon, then moving away from the moon at ideal times during the skirmish. In fact, I later dubbed the entire scene Battle of the Summer Moon. Flash got more humourous kicks playing the cowardly squire hanging on for dear life while the din of battle crashed around him. The knights easily routed the Anduren warriors, killing only a handful as they fled.

At the same time, Thomas charged into the camp with his fellows, though they altered course to combat other riders. Asheria fired arrows, helping rout the second group of Anduren warriors. Dave rolled pretty well using his leadership-type abilities. His knights similarly defeated their Anduren opponents, who scattered and fled into the night.

Bronn had snuck ahead into the main tent where Robat held Sir Krenner, Gant, and the squire. He tried to use his assassination ability to slay Robat. Thus began a fight between the two, which got pretty interesting. Tony seemed to enjoy the fight, although since it was his first session, he had to deal with the learning curve of exteneded contests especially.

The fight continued and Thomas arrived to help (I may have it backwards -- maybe Thomas began the fight, then Bronn snuck in to assassinate/ambush Robat). So, the two continued to fight Robat. In the end, Dave and Tony began using exceptionally high bids like 20 and higher. With a helpful transfer, they managed to put Robat in the dying category. (They had no real understanding that their high bids were the only way to put Robat into that state.) I narrated that Bronn stabbed Robat in the back of the shoulder with his knife, at which point Thomas sliced open Robat's belly with Haven's Claw, his sword.

Thus victorious, Lord Ganeston's army returned to the castle, igniting the sleepy rural community with excitement and danger-now-passed.

Finally, Asheria had already snuck into the camp as well. She helped free Gant and Krenner from their bonds while Bronn and Thomas fought Robat. In the aftermath, she decapitated Robat's corpse. This event caused some discussion among the players then and in days after the game session. Initially, we found it pretty odd and harsh for her to do. Flash and Tony were a bit bothered that the event happened in the game. I found it odd, but agreed. Lisa had similar sentiments. During play, Wendy stood by her action. I role-played it a bit, having Sir Bennett, the knight's captain, remark that it was a brutal end. But, the event remained "in place." (PARAGRAPH EDITED to complete sentence)

The next week, in the fourth session, Wendy said "she was tired" when she decided to decapitate Robat. I believe Lisa and possible Flash and Tony talked about it with her during the week. I found this really interesting, and it was obvious to me they had worked through it in an adult manner! Great! The air had been cleared on this minor issue, and we carried on. Wendy apparently either agreed or was enough concerned that the decapitation event caused some dissonance for the group, and she acknowledged it. I thought that was a great sign of communciation among the group. Wonderful!

Interestingly, however, I had plans in the fourth session to use the decapitation matter in some situations. It did come into play, however not as I expected. I'll explain the actual event in session 4's write-up. What's important now is that we did not "edit" out the decapitation, yet the people still discussed the issue and came to an understanding about in-game events and plausibility.

Another note: I realize now that nearly all my players are using and abusing Magical Abilities, through no fault of their own. Am I correct in understanding that only characters with concentrated magic should be able to use their Magical abilities directly, rather than just as augments? I had completely forgotten that! We're going to have to discuss this as a group, because many players have devoted a lot of attention to their magical abilities. Likely, they'll concentrate and all will be well. (BTW, Wendy has concentrated Aheria's animist magic at character creation.)

[Matt Snyder]

I should have added that session three was well-received by the players in general. We remarked that it was less focused and dramatic as session two, but good overall. I know that Tony, Lisa and Flash stayed up and discussed the session that week. When I learned that, and some of what they said (both good and bad), I was really enthused. That they were discussing it like that at all I took as an extremely good and enthusiastic sign.

I felt pretty good overall about the session as GM. I know I felt like Lisa was missing out when her "lone" character didn't participate in the extended contest battle. Later, in the fourth session (as previous replies in this thread indicate) I felt like I shorted Wendy. So, clearly, thus far my weakness as GM has been shining sufficient spot-light time on all players when there are more than 3-4 playing.

[The GM]

Fascinating.

Do you think that it's possible that you were projecting a tad? That is, perhaps it's you who wanted to see certain things happen with her character that got "missed"?

Did you say anything about it when the opportunity was passing? I'm guessing not? Why?

Heya Mike. I'll get back to your other posts later. I'm on lunch right now and have yet to feed myself! I'm answering this one because I saw there was another post about it as well.
I was right, Wendy was red hot. In fact, so much so that she left early. We've been pals long enough that I can read her moods pretty well. What I was wrong about was the reason for said flared temper. It had nothing to do with gaming and everything to do with a call she took during a short break. I had forgotten that she'd taken a call and made assumptions about her ill humour.
Did I say things to try to get her involved? You bet I did. It just didn't work out. She told me specifically last night that she had no beef with Snyder or the game. She also read your commentary last night and got a giggle. "He thinks *I'm* too shy to speak up? Tee-hee-hee." Then Flash, Wen and I got to talking about the Forge and Flash had to drag out the obligatory GenCon pics so Wendy could put a face with a name, etc...
Back to the point at hand...Do I want to see Wendy do cool things w/ her character? Sure, I do. I'd like to see that from the whole troupe, Matt included. Do I feel she missed opportunities? Perhaps, but that's not my call to make. It's hers.

Alright, back at ya later.

[Mike Holmes]

However, I think a large part of it is due to dysfunctional habits around game where players have trained themselves to sublimate frustrations and get over it for "the good of the group." When this leads to players who are repeatedly getting frustrated and not identifying it, accepting a lessened stake in the creative agenda then it can become a problem.

Deep, Brand, deep. I'm assuming that you're talking "experienced gamers" here? Or do you find this happening with newbs too?

Before we begin, Matt, keep in mind that I know you've seen me GM, and that I know that you know that I don't play as good a game as I talk in terms of advice online. Hell, I probably don't play as well as you are here - this sounds like a spectacular game (wish I was playing). Still, I think it's still good to mention good technique even if one isn't perfect in its use. That is, none of this is so much criticism as commentary on what might work if one remembers to do these things. Not to mention that I'm learning a lot from your responses.

I began the session with an attentive group. So, I simply asked "Who wants to go first?" Wendy beat everyone to the punch.

This is that same Wendy who seems to be unengaged from other comments? Or is that just in other games?

She awoke in the morning, feeling slightly better. She has a practice spirit called Red Bear. One of it's abilties is something like "Healing Slumber." So, we said her injuries were gone.

This is interesting. One of the rules of HQ is the "automatic success" rule. Is that what's being applied here, or is this a case of traditional fiat? Or was the opportunity for a contest simply missed? I'm not saying that there should have been one here, I assume you made the right choice for the time. My question is how you came to the conclusion that there was no need to do a contest here?

Just for argument's sake, wouldn't it have been interesting to see if her spirit may have failed her in this situation? Or her relationship with the spirit, depending?

Robat made an offer. Either Asheria or Gant would be allowed to go free. Then, he or she must go to the castle and free Gildas within two days. Failure meant the Anduren would kill the other.

Once offered, I could see Wendy excitedly volunteer. She didn't miss a beat to have Asheria offer to go to the castle and free Gildas. She joked -- I many of us did -- that she had little concern for Gant's fate.

Something seems contradictory here. The tension here was in choosing who to go? Or not?

Tony created a magical keyword involving a spider cult to tie with his upbringing in an assassin's coven. His abilities are neat ideas!

Isn't it just ridiculously fun, creating magic keywords? Sorry, rhetorical question. :-)

When Lord Ganeston told him that Gildas already admitted his intentions to kill the lord, Tony chuckled. He continued Finn's desperate dialogue, making up more lies.

Subtle Bang. Interesting response. :-)

Upon returning to his cell, Finn decided to make his move. Tony also created a magical ability called "Shadow Dancer" that lets him "leap" from shadow to shadow. (Just now writing this, I recall that HeroQuest advises against teleportation powers almost entirely; I didn't find it to be a problem.)

I don't think that it's as problematic as they make it out to be. Given the implicit limits of this particular power (sounds like it's line of sight), I don't think it's problematic at all, really. Remember the "pompous magic" rule, too. It may be described like teleportation, but, perhaps there are other limits to it. For example, if it's a 17 and rolling against a guard's Perceptive 17, then describing it as teleporting without a trace makes the guard having a good chance of winning seem implausible. So perhaps the shadow left leaves wispy traces that indicate the direction that the "dancer" has danced towards or something. Or it's just a "faulty" ability that tends not to work very often. Somthing that can explain the level at which it tends to fail.

Note that you don't have to do this, you can just leave the percentages down to "dramatic pacing" or whatever. But it's often fun to use the lack of perfection of an ability to give it some flavor in limiting it. Make sense?

Gildas gasped at the magical transformation, but he successfully fended off Bronn's strangling attack. (In a simple contest, Tony lost a simple contest) The guards entered the cell, and Bronn vanished into the shadows.

Thwarted! I say this a lot, but failing is common and fun in HQ. Not something to be feared by the player.

Tony greatly enjoyed the sinister moves of his character, but seemed a bit frustrated with die rolls. His post above in this thread explains some of that.

Again, this is the common first reaction to the system in action. So far, everybody who I've talked to gets over it by simply playing more sessions.

Squire Gwyn and his lady knight, Josianne, returned to the castle from their encounter with the war band.

...

This set up a fun conflict for Flash's character, Gwyn. He's stuck between his loyalty to Josianne and his constant cowardice.

How come I can see Flash playing this character. :-)

Is she a follower, technically? Ally? Sounds like not a follower, as you're making the moves for her, Matt?

Put on the spot by Lord Ganeston himself to vouch for her report. Flash moaned with the tension and choice, chuckled, then ultimately decided to have Gwyn go along with Josianne. Flash seems to really enjoy making these choices (there have been several in the game so far), but he also role-plays them in a way that portrays Gwyn as the clever coward (often humorously so).

Well played, Matt. Either way, the cowardice comes into play. This is a subtle sort of Bang that I've noticed of late - give the character two equal choices based on the same characteristic. Go with her to danger, or cross her dangerously? The result is that the characteristic in question is made more clear as we see what the character fears most. He'd rather go into a dangerous situation, than cross his lady - given no choice but to chose one or the other. Nice.

I realize, now, that it may have been interesting to use simple contests, or even extended contests to have her convince the two farm wives she talked with to take the baby. But, it still worked out wonderfully.

Yeah. I tend to overuse contests, myself, but given that the outputs are interesting in all cases, I personally feel that it's OK to trend that way, and use the outcomes for inspiration.

Gabrielle then visited Lady Thorel and told her she had found a suitable home. Lady Thorel then asked to meet the "family." Lisa and I both got a chuckle out of this – part of the reason she had difficultly convincing the farm families to take the baby was that they wanted to meet the mother. Lisa's plans were to see that didn't happen to protect the lady's identity. So, this was me giving her a good razzing, and I think she found it humorous. We chuckled. I don't think I'd have done this to her had the idea of Quint as adoptive father come into play. I think it could have been a very frustrating thing for her, and it may have felt like rail-roading on my part.

OK, this needs a little expansion. Was it just that you hammered on this problem repeatedly? Why was it "razzing"? Was it almost like railroading because of the potential implausibility of so many people asking after the family?

I had prepared Lisa's main choice for the game, but it became a bit blurred. Originally, I was going to have her choose between Lady Thorel's need for constant help and Quint's offer of tutelage (hinting that it would be magical instruction). Quint did make the offer, but with the spontaneous idea of having him take Lady Thorel's baby, that conflict deflated. Still, the story events were surprising to me (and I think Lisa, too), and I enjoyed them very much for that reason!

This happens a lot. I'm betting, however that you were thinking on your feet, and found a way to turn this into a different conflict?

Interestingly, Dave demonstrated some mild frustration at that point. He was concerned that he'd be losing his best ability -- his relationship with Sir Baldwin. So, he showed me  his character sheet, and we came up with a pretty generous and interesting solution. Thomas has a magical ability Dave came up with called "Old Man's Eye." We had no idea what that did or meant, but he had it! So, I let him transfer the entire rating from his relationship with Baldwin to his magical ability Old Man Eye, setting the ability somewhere around 14M1 (we use M instead of W for our mastery nomenclature). He would have to cement this, but the bonus was still pretty generous, I think. I also reasoned that he's less likely to use Old Man's Eye

Interesting. I did something similar recently, actually. But generally speaking, a "stacked" ability is worth more than two unstacked. That is, do you think you may have sorta overdone it in givng the player such a high ability out of the blue? Anyhow, the common wisdom as to the options with relationships that die are:

[*]Replace the relationship with another. Baldwin dies, leaving his son to the squire's care. Or this puts him in the service of another knight - or, better, with a choice of two. In fact, this is a great opportunity, generally, to give the player the choice of two abilities to replace the lost one with.
[*]The ability does not go away. Just because Baldwin is dead, doesn't mean that Squire Thomas no longer has feelings for him. Relationships aren't just to get people to do things, but they're good for augmenting all sorts of stuff. Was Baldwin killed by someone? Well, then the relationship augments the squires' every effort to find the killer (assuming it was "Loyal to Baldwin" or something).
[*]Replace with an heirloom. Baldwin leaves his magic sword to his squire. This, coincidentally serves as a token holding the "lost" relationship. That is, he can still augment with "Baldwin's Sword" to find his killers.[/list:u]
Generally, the exchange is coolest if it flows from the loss.

This set up an interesting moral dilemma, but one that Dave took no hesitation to make. He wanted knighthood, and had his father circumvent tradition.

I used to worry that if a player jumped on a particular choice without anguishing over it, that I had made a weak bang, or was railroading. Not true. It's only bad if the player doesn't sense that it really was his choice. Even if it's a "duh, no brainer" in the player's opinion, as long as he knows that you thought there was a conflict, they'll be pleased to make the decision. IME. In fact, I've come to think that these are actually important to have in play. Not that you should aim for them, but that they provide a certain sort of drama that you don't get elsewhere.

NOTE: At this point, we had several narrative "strands" that began to converge. And, we realized that the "timeline" for each wasn't quite correct. So, we talked about it openly as a group, and decided to "edit" the timeframes so that every strand (Gwyn's rescue, Baldwin's death, and Asheria's return) converged on the same early morning.

BTW, this is a great report. :-)

For the above, you actually retconned the action? Or did you simply leap ahead to some convenient future time? Why not just say that those in an earlier frame are delayed, for some dramatic reason, til the times coincide, thus avoiding the retcon? Or is that what happend?

I enjoyed that bit, because it set up a conflict for Flash and his troupe. Their under-reporting of the war clan gets them in a bit of trouble. I like it when the players are helping create such situations.

Indeed. Every time the players create adversity for each other, it's less work for the narrator. :-)

Dave took the opportunity to make an interesting gesture. Thomas took out his sword, which is a special possession he created during character creation (the sword's name currently escapes me -- something like Haven's Claw). Thomas grabbed the edge of the blade, cutting his hand as an oath of fealty. "To the last drop," he said. A nice little moment! Dave portrayed his character quiety, honorably.

Basic narrativism. Nothing tactical about it, nothing saying it was the "correct" thing to do in such a situation, simply a player displaying his character through a decision he created on the spot (to do or not). This is what I'm trying to indicate in another current thread, actually. Narrativism is just play and occurs unconsciously, and often without any special technique at all.

Lisa later remarked that she thought Dave's role-playing for that oath was the best of the session, and that she thought the other players missed the subtle beauty of the moment. I think it was relatively subtle, and perhaps Dave should have earned more reaction from the players. I did enjoy the moment immensely, if not as vocally as it may have deserved...

Did it get him HP from players?

I recall some discussion about attack plans and concern about combat abilities. At that point, I reminded them that there was less need to be concerned about blow-by-blow tactics and combat effectiveness -- that HeroQuest abilities need not be swords and armor and riding to make this plan work.

Are the characters "starting characters"? That is, did you give them any Advanced Experience? If not, then both the players and characters are correct in questioning their character's ability levels. That is, their characters are not incompetent, but there's every chance that they're going to meet characters more potent than they are. For the characters, I'd let them worry. For the players I'd remind them that failure is a good thing in HQ, and that with HP amazing things can happen, for the underdog. Basically HQ is one of the only games I know where going up against bad odds is really a good idea from the player's POV. Or should be. :-)

Thus began the session's only extended contest. I divided the camp into two sections/AP pools, then had a third AP pool for Robat, the warclan leader.

Really? Why? Why not one big pool?

For the contest, I asked for AP bids, then let the highest bid go (including my own bids, which ended up being lower almost every time than those risk-taking players!).

This is a common observation. And it's not a bad thing. You may want to inform the characters that, when they have the advantage that it's tactically more sound to go with low bids. But that often doesn't matter, because big bids are dramatic. So it doesn't really matter in the end.

Flash got more humourous kicks playing the cowardly squire hanging on for dear life while the din of battle crashed around him.

Did he ever get to use his Cowardly to augment positively? I find that if you allow flaws (this was a free flaw, right?) to be used positively once in a while, that players find ways to get flaws. Which is fun. Basically, I advertise flaws as "free abilities that I deem as the sort of thing that I'd be likely to use against you frequently." Seen that way, players find them a bargain. Also, it's completely kosher for characters to gain flaws at any time at any level, even mid conflict. Just some things to keep in mind. It's like the dark side of the force - a player wants a tad more oomph to defeat some guy so he takes "Hates SomeGuy 5W." Great - later you can hose him with it real good! :-)

Bronn had snuck ahead into the main tent where Robat held Sir Krenner, Gant, and the squire. He tried to use his assassination ability to slay Robat. Thus began a fight between the two, which got pretty interesting.

So the separate pool was for a separate contest? Hmmm. Don't you set pools as needed by the situation? Something I'm missing here.

So, the two continued to fight Robat. In the end, Dave and Tony began using exceptionally high bids like 20 and higher. With a helpful transfer, they managed to put Robat in the dying category. (They had no real understanding that their high bids were the only way to put Robat into that state.) I narrated that Bronn stabbed Robat in the back of the shoulder with his knife, at which point Thomas sliced open Robat's belly with Haven's Claw, his sword.

Pretty dramatic. But make sure the players get how this works. What happens is that they can then tailor their bids so that they don't kill off their enemies. Because they might like that enemy and not want him dead yet. It's fun to defeat an enemy only to have him escape so that you can beat him again later.

Another note: I realize now that nearly all my players are using and abusing Magical Abilities, through no fault of their own. Am I correct in understanding that only characters with concentrated magic should be able to use their Magical abilities directly, rather than just as augments? I had completely forgotten that! We're going to have to discuss this as a group, because many players have devoted a lot of attention to their magical abilities. Likely, they'll concentrate and all will be well. (BTW, Wendy has concentrated Aheria's animist magic at character creation.)

Actually this depends on the magic keyword in question. The terms used are "Passive," meaning augments only, and "Active" meaning able to augment or use the normal ability.

[*]Common Magic: Passive, Active with Concentration (in Common Magic), or concentration in the appropriate otherworld - see below for all XYZ.
[*]Spiritist (Tradition Charms): Passive, period.
[*]Practitioner: Practice Charms and Fetishes can be used Actively or Passively regardless of concentration (in addition to "special release" for Fetishes).
[*]Shamans: Concentration required, but otherwise like Practitioners.
[*]All Animists: If concentrated, can use common magic charms Actively. (yes, this means that their common magic charms can be used actively, while their tradition charms cannot. Long explanation, but it makes sense).
[*]Initiate: Affinities are always Passive, but feats, Active, can be improvised at -10, or -5 if concentrated.
[*]Devotee: Concentration required. Feats are active at full value.
All Theists: If concentrated, can use common magic feats Actively.
[*]Orderly/Liturgist: frankly I forget at this point. :-)
[*]Adept: All spells active, except common magic, unless concentrated.
All Wizards: If concentrated, common magic spells can be used actively. [/list:u]
Mike

[Mike Holmes]

Did it again. Two posts in a row (see above).

Then Flash, Wen and I got to talking about the Forge and Flash had to drag out the obligatory GenCon pics so Wendy could put a face with a name, etc...

Yep, that's me, the big bald guy. Hiya all! Ask Flash and Matt about the MLWM game they forced me to run for them sometime (if they haven't forced it on you already). :-)

Back to the point at hand...Do I want to see Wendy do cool things w/ her character? Sure, I do. I'd like to see that from the whole troupe, Matt included. Do I feel she missed opportunities? Perhaps, but that's not my call to make. It's hers.

Of course, her character, she's where tthe buck stops on the character. But, that said, don't you guys ever make suggestions to each other? "Dude, you could have your guy show up now, and we could fight the demon together!" Doesn't mean she has to accept the suggestion. But usually it doesn't hurt to make the suggestion. Often it's appreciated.

Actually, there are occasions where it's not appreciated, but usually this involves the suggestion stealing the thunder of the person who was going to suggest the action anyhow, or browbeating the player in question. The point is that you can subtly help each other get into the action by making suggestions like this. And in the end it may create action that more than one player wants to see.

Just a thought.

Mike

[Brand_Robins]

When this leads to players who are repeatedly getting frustrated and not identifying it, accepting a lessened stake in the creative agenda then it can become a problem.

Deep, Brand, deep. I'm assuming that you're talking "experienced gamers" here? Or do you find this happening with newbs too?

Mostly with experienced players. Especially with a few members of my group who used to play with an extremly... um... what's the proper Forge term for "destructive asshole GM"... who would punish them for expressing disconent, punish them (in and out of game) for getting frustrated, and would withdraw social friendship and support from those who he found out were speaking to each other about his game in negative ways.

With those folks as soon as I ask them if they're okay, want a scene, have something on their mind you can see this switch flipping and they instantly insist that everything is okay. At this point I've managed to mostly break them of the habit, but you can still see the Pavlovian response now and then.

However the social preasures of a group dynamic have, on occasion, made even newbs manifest a similar response. Especially when you have a mixed group of newbs and experienced players and the experienced players are not showing signs of disconent. (Or are visibly showing signs of swallowing it, in which case the newbs take that as a cue as to how the group works.)

[Mike Holmes]

Especially with a few members of my group who used to play with an extremly... um... what's the proper Forge term for "destructive asshole GM"...

OK, so I laughed when I read this. Does that make me bad?

Good notes, Brand, but I'm guessing that this doesn't quite apply in this case. Matt, all y'all, none of your group has been subjected to this sort of thing, have ya?

OTOH, who knows, maybe it happens on much subtler levels, too.

Mike

[Matt Snyder]

Of course, her character, she's where tthe buck stops on the character. But, that said, don't you guys ever make suggestions to each other? "Dude, you could have your guy show up now, and we could fight the demon together!" Doesn't mean she has to accept the suggestion. But usually it doesn't hurt to make the suggestion. Often it's appreciated.

This is definitely happening. In fact, I addressed it specifically before we started playing session four in front of the whole group. I heartily endorsed the practice, and I brought up specific examples where people had already done so in previous sessions of FoF.

[Brand_Robins]

OTOH, who knows, maybe it happens on much subtler levels, too.

It does. I first noticed it because of the extreme trauma of some of the members of my group, but I've since gone on to see it in many other groups, even ones that are otherwise perfectly functional.

It's a tricky issue at the most subtle levels though because there is a degree to which we, as adults, have to swallow some level of difficulty in order to co-exist in a group. So the line between what really is good for the group and what is simply avoiding confrontation at the expense of CA can be touch and go.

[Mike Holmes]

Cool, Matt.

Got any room for an online participant?

Let's see, Mapquest says that it's only 375 miles from me to Carlisle, slightly less than 6 hours travel time. Bet I could do it in 5. Hmmm.

;-)

Mike

p.s. Brand, I'm sure you're right. The question is whether or not it pertains here.

[Matt Snyder]

Before we begin, Matt, keep in mind that I know you've seen me GM, and that I know that you know that I don't play as good a game as I talk in terms of advice online. Hell, I probably don't play as well as you are here - this sounds like a spectacular game (wish I was playing). Still, I think it's still good to mention good technique even if one isn't perfect in its use. That is, none of this is so much criticism as commentary on what might work if one remembers to do these things. Not to mention that I'm learning a lot from your responses.

Right on, man. I'm with you.

I began the session with an attentive group. So, I simply asked "Who wants to go first?" Wendy beat everyone to the punch.

This is that same Wendy who seems to be unengaged from other comments? Or is that just in other games?

Same gal. She seems to ME to be far more eager in this game. Maybe not anomalous for HER, but different from 1) my prior experience GMing with her and (especially) 2) my more proactive treatment of her as a member of the group.

One of the rules of HQ is the "automatic success" rule. Is that what's being applied here, or is this a case of traditional fiat? Or was the opportunity for a contest simply missed? I'm not saying that there should have been one here, I assume you made the right choice for the time. My question is how you came to the conclusion that there was no need to do a contest here?

Just for argument's sake, wouldn't it have been interesting to see if her spirit may have failed her in this situation? Or her relationship with the spirit, depending?

Good point! That is a reason I like for doing the contest. But, I simply said Asheria was hurt-free given the context. It was me applying auto-success, as you suggest. She'd slept through a night and a day, so it made sense at that point in time, which literally was the start of the session.

Once offered, I could see Wendy excitedly volunteer. She didn't miss a beat to have Asheria offer to go to the castle and free Gildas. She joked -- I many of us did -- that she had little concern for Gant's fate.

Something seems contradictory here. The tension here was in choosing who to go? Or not?

Ah! Subtlety caught. The Anduren warchief could not fathom a daughter-father bond in which this would have been anything short of an agonizing choice for them. He had no concept of "step-father" when Asheria explained that was her relationship. He heard that, and then immediately thought "Yes, father, what I said." That was close to my actual dialogue. Robat thought he was torturing the pair, having no idea Asheria's relationship is, in fact, more troubled.

So far, everybody who I've talked to gets over it by simply playing more sessions.

Yep. There was much "Aha!" in a secondary rules explanation in the minutes before session 4. And, more successes in session 4 made people seem much more comfortable. Tony especially.

Is (Josianne) a follower, technically? Ally? Sounds like not a follower, as you're making the moves for her, Matt?

Correct. She is an important NPC, not a follower, and I have guided her choices. She has been pivotal in creating conflicts involving Gwyn. Obviously, Flash has a relationship ability with her. She is THE central figure in the much-alluded-to "shocking moment" in session four. Ron, author of Sex & Sorcery (ahem), should eat it up.

OK, this needs a little expansion. Was it just that you hammered on this problem repeatedly? Why was it "razzing"? Was it almost like railroading because of the potential implausibility of so many people asking after the family?

Yeah, I wondered if this was unclear. Here's what happened: When Gabrielle interviewed the farmwives, it was a deal-breaker for her when the farmwives wanted to meet the mother. Once they said that, Lisa decided that Gabrielle would have to find another family, period. They said it, she left. Total deal-breaker.

So, later, when she DID find a family, albeit one old hermit, it was a razz because one of the first things out of Lady Thorel's mouth was "I shall have to meet him." That is, Gabrielle's strict concern that mom and adoptive parents must not meet was unwarranted; she thought she had Lady Thorel's best interests in mind. And, yet, she made big choices on that assumption. I didn't like that this may have been taken as me railroading so that she'd leave the kid with Old Quint. In fact, it was HER idea, and I never saw it coming!

This happens a lot. I'm betting, however that you were thinking on your feet, and found a way to turn this into a different conflict?

Um. Sure! Yeah, actually it worked out that way, although how much credit my wits deserve is doubtful.

I did something similar recently, actually. But generally speaking, a "stacked" ability is worth more than two unstacked. That is, do you think you may have sorta overdone it in givng the player such a high ability out of the blue? Anyhow, the common wisdom as to the options with relationships that die are:

[*]Replace the relationship with another....
[*]The ability does not go away...
[*]Replace with an heirloom...

Great ideas! I almost opted for No. 2, but hadn't considered the others.

I realized right away that stacking two abilities was a very generous trade off in Dave's favor. But, I also thought it evened out pretty well. In the game, people's relationships are constantly used. By comparison, I reasoned, how often is Dave going to use "Old Man's Eye"? Now, sure, if he's really clever, a LOT. But, he has not at all abused it, and we both thought it was too cool to pass up that "old" Baldwin's soul would be inspiring his Old Man's Eye. Very neato. One of my greatest "side effect" delights in HeroQuest is making use of some obscurely worded or arcane title like that.

I used to worry that if a player jumped on a particular choice without anguishing over it, that I had made a weak bang, or was railroading. Not true. It's only bad if the player doesn't sense that it really was his choice.

Yep. And I think that reaction in players has made people really puzzle over Narrativism over the years here on the Forge. I was surprised at first, but I realized what he was up to, especially with his oath-swearing.

For the above, you actually retconned the action? Or did you simply leap ahead to some convenient future time? Why not just say that those in an earlier frame are delayed, for some dramatic reason, til the times coincide, thus avoiding the retcon? Or is that what happend?

The reason involved Asheria's timeframe, mainly. And some decision details from Gwyn I forgot to include! When Asheria did return, because of her "bear sleep," we realized she was a day in the future. But, Josianne and Gwyn were about to leave to regain their honor (despite lying to the lord about the numbers of Anduren). Asheria returned and told the lord. THEN, Ganeston summoned Josianne and Gwyn to confess. They did, reluctantly. Another time to put Gwyn on the spot with authority. More amusing cowardice.

So, to avoid the passing ships in the night routine between Gwyn and Ahserian, we said, "Ok, Wendy, you slept over night, but not through the day, and we'll have Dave's discovery of Baldwin's death be right now. Cool? All this goes down just before dawn." No problems.

Basic narrativism. Nothing tactical about it, nothing saying it was the "correct" thing to do in such a situation, simply a player displaying his character through a decision he created on the spot (to do or not). This is what I'm trying to indicate in another current thread, actually. Narrativism is just play and occurs unconsciously, and often without any special technique at all.

Absolutely. There is no special understanding needed. Just do what people do when they react to "stuff", emotional stuff especially. Dave, especially, has no special knowledge of Forge theory, etc. He's only vaguely familiar, and certainly not well versed at all. He just does what comes natural, and plays. And, WHAM! Good stuff happens. This ain't rocket science.

Lisa later remarked that she thought Dave's role-playing for that oath was the best of the session, and that she thought the other players missed the subtle beauty of the moment. I think it was relatively subtle, and perhaps Dave should have earned more reaction from the players. I did enjoy the moment immensely, if not as vocally as it may have deserved...

Did it get him HP from players?

We werent' using that rule until session four, alas. In fact, Lisa's remarks about this scene were a major reason why I did implement the rules.

Thus began the session's only extended contest. I divided the camp into two sections/AP pools, then had a third AP pool for Robat, the warclan leader.

Really? Why? Why not one big pool?

Good question. I guess I divided it that way to present challenges to each player. Now that you mention it this way, I can see how it really could have been a more cohesive and rewarding group victory had they all faced off against the Anduren host as one AP pool.

Frankly, my "proper" handling of the masses in combat was probably way off base, rules-wise. I was likely far too kind to the players, not granting sufficient ratings and AP to the warriors. Robat himself, was, I think, properly "statted", although he may have lacked for support of his warrior community.

Flash got more humourous kicks playing the cowardly squire hanging on for dear life while the din of battle crashed around him.

Did he ever get to use his Cowardly to augment positively? [/quote]

Actually, Flash PAID for his "Craven" abillity, and he uses it postively (i.e. successfully) often. Too often! It isn't a flaw, really. At least, not in practice to date. I SHOULD have penalized him (all of -2) in session 4 when he acted very heroically, though I suspect he'd have still triumphed as he did.

So the separate pool was for a separate contest? Hmmm. Don't you set pools as needed by the situation? Something I'm missing here.

Hmm, I'm probably missing something, too. I believe the extended contest didn't start until after Tony wanted to ambush/assinate Robat. He snuck in early, I think. Regardless, I do recall that Robat's pool was set at the onset of conflit with everyone else, as was Bronn's. If Tony did anything new, it was to switch abilties in the second round of the extended contest.

Actually this depends on the magic keyword in question. The terms used are "Passive," meaning augments only, and "Active" meaning able to augment or use the normal ability.

Very helpful, Mike. Thanks. Since it's slightly fuzzy what our character's magical abilties are (this not being Glorantha, albeit pretty analogous), I'll have to think on it. Most people have Common Magic, it seems clear to me. But, one or two might have a Theist ability -- Bronn's spider abilities for example. I'll figure it out. It'll stop that pesky Flash from winning too easily with his Weasel's Luck ability! I've also considered imposing more "improvised" penalties for that ability, specifically.

[Valamir]

It'll stop that pesky Flash from winning too easily with his Weasel's Luck ability!

Heh.  Is "Weasel's Luck" a Trait of the character...or a Trait of Flash himself ;-)