You Call that Strife??? I'll Give you Strife!!!

[Kat Miller]

This may be headed into the Alternate rules for WGP but it's such a powerful idea I wanted to bounce it off the list while there is still room for it in the full addition.

Mike and I were discussing how Strife and the Plan work together on the drive to Dexcon.  After a Hero has devastated his Strife aspect and it is in the control of the Villain, the strife goes through a second suffering phase, which as written, I don't currently like.

I want the Villain to start paying cards to heal that Aspect in order to make it his own.  The way I see it if the Strife is a relationship aspect, at the time of devastation they hate the villain, they might not be too happy with the hero who hasn't rescued them yet, but they HATE the villain.

Then there should be an enrichment scene and it costing the villain 4 cards because the Strife aspect is in Devastation.  In that scene the villain makes an overture to the aspect.  trying to make the Strife more comfortable, tells the Strife "I'm sure the hero will rescue you soon, I know if I were your hero I'd walk though fire before I'd let you stay in the clutches of someone like me".  The scene is already paid for the Strife moves from Devastated to Imperiled.  Because it is an enrichment scene the Villain still needs to set stakes about something but in the case of a Strife, the Scene should focus on the Strife and pit the hero against the Strife.

Example:
  "Perhaps he's just not the friend you thought he was,"  continues the Villain.  The conflict of the enrichment scene becomes whether the Strife has unshaken faith in the hero.  Cards are flipped.



Now here is the BANG part of the idea; when a player devastates his strife, he gets the bonuses of having wild cards, ten cards are pulled from the hero deck and set in a stack in front of the Villain.  These Cards are that Strife and will be used to pay for healing the poor suffering strife.   As the Strife moves from Devastation to Prime that stack of 10 cards will get smaller and smaller.  Once the Strife is Primed, The Villain may now use it as his own aspect.   Even if the Heroes rescue the Strife later, the Villain imposes an alteration on it.

The important thing for me is the ten card thing.  It solves two problems.  First it is a visual cue to the players- AHHHH TEN CARDS OUT OF PLAY FROM OUR SHARED DECK!!!!!!  That aspect is important and loosing it bares a price felt by all the players.   As you pay that cost the stack shrinks and every one at the table can see how close the Strife is to being lost.  I think this adds a necessary tension.

The loss of ten cards also makes it that much more urgent for players to play to the story arc to get decks from the Villain.

Those ten cards also allow that the villain, who near the end of the story arc is the one suffering a card shortage will be able to pay for the devastated strife cost no matter what.


Mike has two concerns.
He worries that the 10 card is a double penalty for the player who just lost that aspect.
(oddly I'm usually all about the heroes side of things and this doesn't bother me...it makes the Strife feel more Strife like)

and Mike also worried that if we're playing with 4 heroes and all 4 heroes devastate their strife at the same time the hero deck is now down 40 cards.

But to me, IF the heroes have ALL devastated their strife and No one had played to the Story Arc to get a deck back yet, they deserve to share the 14 cards they'll have left (12 + 2 Jokers)

I'm wondering what others think.

-kat

[Thor Olavsrud]

Hi Kat,

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. A concrete example would help, I think. I'm definitely willing to be convinced.

In the meantime, here are my concerns:

• Even after an Aspect has been devastated, it is still the Hero's aspect, even if the GM now has control of it. It seems to me that at this point the GM is granted the power to pull out all the stops to increase the suffering between the Hero and one of his Aspects. It should always be about the Hero and his relationship with the Aspect.

[li]As a corollary with the first point, it seems to me that a villain increasing a relationship with a hero's Aspect is just another way of increasing the suffering of an Aspect in relation to the character that has it written on his sheet. For instance, in your example, '"Perhaps he's just not the friend you thought he was,"  continues the Villain.  The conflict of the enrichment scene becomes whether the Strife has unshaken faith in the hero.  Cards are flipped.' It seems to me this is ALL about the Hero and his relationship to the Aspect. If the villain is successful in this overture, it increases the Suffering of the Aspect in relation to the Hero.[/li]


[li]If you want to make the players really pay to rescue their Aspects from the GM, and really sweat the choice,  maybe they can continue to spend cards to lower the Suffering of their Aspects even after the GM takes control of it. Cards spent to do this are given to the GM. I'm still not clear on how redemption works yet, so this may not be a workable idea, but thought I'd put it out there. If this does work, I think it would be more effective than simply taking away 10 player cards. Because now the player has a really desperate choice: He can try to protect his Devastated Aspect and prevent the villain from forcing it to change in some way, but by doing so he will be empowering the GM with extra cards just as things are reaching a climax.[/li]


[li]If you want the villain to be able to take an Aspect for his own, I think the best way to handle it is to Ink that as the change that occurs after the Aspect has been twice devastated. Seems a perfect twist to throw in during the Letters Page phase.[/li][/list]

Anyway, don't get me wrong. I think it's a fascinating idea. I just need to understand all the ramifications.