[Inn at the Edge of Forever] Basic Mechanics

[ks13]

But who would define the consequence? I guess that would fall to the GMs. I guess the role of the other players is to make your story as humiliating or foolish as possible, whilst making their own look heroic and wonderful.

Either the principle player or the GM. I would say let the player define the consequence in the same way as they already can define a secret. The GM will still have responsibility to decide if a situation allows the Consequence to be invoked (and thus removed from play mechanical, though of course it may continue to have ramifications on the plot and PC/NPC actions). The player wants to invoke the Consequence fairly soon in order to open up that Secret slot again, and they don't want have it come in a very inconvenient spot. The other players of course, want to use it to their advantage. I don't believe that the intent will necessarily be to humiliate or diminish the other story. It think this would play out more in terms of one up-manship, but without undermining the other players (characters yes, other players or the overall story, no).

You said that the characters are telling the stories to each other. Does that mean that all the "action" has happened in the past and the stories are basically being reconstructed through their telling? It would help to see how you image the play would proceed. When are the players talking as characters to each other in "present time", when are the characters "inside their stories", etc. Also, if you have worked up the Power 19 replies, please post them.

I will send some ideas on the mechanics to you via PM, and keep this thread open for a discussion of the more general concepts.

-Al

[andrew_kenrick]

I don't believe that the intent will necessarily be to humiliate or diminish the other story. It think this would play out more in terms of one up-manship, but without undermining the other players (characters yes, other players or the overall story, no).

Yes, I see it as one up-manship with one another, in character of course.

You said that the characters are telling the stories to each other. Does that mean that all the "action" has happened in the past and the stories are basically being reconstructed through their telling? It would help to see how you image the play would proceed. When are the players talking as characters to each other in "present time", when are the characters "inside their stories", etc.

Yes, all the action has happened in the past, which means that although the characters can struggle, battle and fail, they cannot die ... at least not permanently.

I envisage that the characters would talk to one another outside of the story as a framing mechanism, or when interjecting new elements into each other's stories ("aah, so this must be when the great bull scarred you so!"), in a similar way to how it works in Baron Munchausen. I'm not sure if there will be a clear delineation as to when you are telling the story and when you are out of the story, but I suspect the context and tense will help avoid confusion.

Also, if you have worked up the Power 19 replies, please post them.

Still working on them - I'm about midway through but will have them ready today or tomorrow. I'll post them in their own thread.

[andrew_kenrick]

I've posted the Power 19 now, along with some questions. Hopefully all will become clearer!