OtherKind Non-Combat Results

[lumpley]

Over in Actual Play, Andrew Martin suggests that I give OtherKind non-combat mechanics.  I personally don't think that the mechanics as they exist are only and exclusively combat mechanics, but they definitely don't care about any conflict where nobody might get hurt.

Thoughts, anybody, Andrew?  Any suggestions for how a non-combat roll might look?

-Vincent

[Nathan]

Otherkind is cool. :)

Think about it like this -- let's say that my elf decides to try to persuade a non-hostile human leader to not settle in the forest. So, we have a cup of tea, but it is an intense moment of politics and more. So I roll -- uh oh, I assign a 1 to Life. That means, during the negotiation, I spoke so eloquently that he and his entire colony dies??

I think that is what they mean... interesting dilemna..

Thanks,
Nathan

[Jared A. Sorensen]

Otherkind is cool. :)

Think about it like this -- let's say that my elf decides to try to persuade a non-hostile human leader to not settle in the forest. So, we have a cup of tea, but it is an intense moment of politics and more. So I roll -- uh oh, I assign a 1 to Life. That means, during the negotiation, I spoke so eloquently that he and his entire colony dies??

I think that is what they mean... interesting dilemna..

Thanks,
Nathan

You could abstract it out to Story / Goal / Self / Other -- Story is Narration, Goal becomes less direction of movement and more direction of desires (you either get closer, farther away or stay more or less the same), Self could be anything from injury (in combat) to...I dunno, drinking your tea wrong and looking like a bumpkin. Other would be harming the enemy or having THEM do something that hurts their reputation...

[Blake Hutchins]

A negative result for Self complicates the situation or conflict in a meaningful, personal way.  Maybe in the tea-drinking example, the character unwittingly makes an enemy, or the human captain's daughter falls in love with him/her and gains a point of Moonlight, or an ineffable sadness lodges in the character's heart like a spiritual wound.

Best,

Blake

[Bankuei]

You could abstract it out to Story / Goal / Self / Other

I like it, you could also call Self/Other, Cost/Sacrifice, as in the cost to you as the character, and the sacrifice of other folks to acheive your goal, or in the failure thereof.

Chris

[Nathan]

I wanted to give this some thought for you....

The biggest problem in the four - Narration, Motion, Life, and Safety - is that your descriptions and examples all revolve around combat. I notice that you only use examples of combat in your game -- I assume that is what the game is supposed to do? Just combat?

Otherwise, if you come up with slightly different definitions to Life and Safety, I could see them working perhaps.

Life - Perhaps a 6,5 here means you convince your enemies to do what you want. Not only do you NOT hurt them, but you convince them to understand what is going on...

Safety - In non-combative situations, this could mean you aren't thrown in jail, the villagers do not attack you, bring out the pitchforks, or what not. With a high safety, you somehow manage to convince the humans that you are not a bloodthirsty, pissed Otherkind beast. :)

So, let's try this out here...

The leader of the colonists struts out of his tent, his hand grasping the iron sword at his side. He sees you, and his face registers with slight fear and wonderment. His men are bristling -- some seem frightened, others seem angry. The leader pauses, clears his throat and asks, "What did you come here for.... beast?"

I roll, using my graceful storytelling die and get -- 6, 4, 3, 2, 1. I assign the 6 to Life, 4 to Narration, 3 to Motion, 2 to Safety...

I describe what happens -- "I lower my weapon and tell the leader the story of my grandfather, who sired the trees of this forest. I tell him of my youth, of the cool summer eves when the breeze brought with it sweet fragrances. I tell him of the good spirits of the forest. His eyes and the colonists' eyes well up with tears. For a moment, they are lost in my childhood... The leader and colonists agree with my demands (Life 6) after several excruciating hours of debates and arguments (Motion 3). I wait patiently until he informs that the colonists will seek another forest to build their village in -- but he tells me that if I am ever caught near his people again, he will  hunt me down and destroy me (Safety 2). I bristle at the insult, nod respectfully, and leave."

Something like this, eh?

Thanks,
Nathan

[Mike Holmes]

It's probably obvious, but I really like Jared's idea of expanding the definitions to include anything, and having combat just be a specific application of the general mechanic. Definitely go with something like that or what Chris has.

I may have to link my rant on Combat Systems to this discussion as a case in point.

Mike

[lumpley]

Hey everybody, thanks!  I'm with you except for one thing.

Losing Connection to Life when you assign a low die to Life is one of the critical bits of the mechanic.  I'm all over Motion toward your goal being simply making progress, whether that's actual physical motion or swaying someone's opinion or what.  Similarly, complications and disasters and grief instead of just injuries for low Safety dice, that's very cool.  But I think that for Life, if you assign a 1 or 2, you really gotta kill 'em.  I can't see how hurting somebody's reputation should cost you Connection to Life.

(If you don't want to kill people, it's wicked easy to do.  Just don't assign a 1 or 2 to Life-Other.  Sometimes that will mean assigning a 1 or 2 to Motion-Goal or Safety-Self or Narration instead.)

So is it automatically a combat system if someone always might get killed?  Is there some sort of alternative, where you can assign a low die to Other and it doesn't mean you kill them?

But otherwise, yeah.  Consider those changes made.

-Vincent

Oh, can we talk names a bit?  Narration is good, obviously.  Cost to Self?  Progress?  Cost to Others?  It's more like Preservation of Self/Others, though.  It's kind of a dumbly practical question, but I'd love the input.  What do you think?

[Valamir]

I agree Vincent.  Perhaps you should broaden it just a little bit to include "causeing death" not just killing first hand.

In otherwords: If  I trick a human into executing one of my Iron adversaries for some false crime, should or shouldn't that effect my connection to Life as much as if I killed him with my own two hands/paws/horns/ what ever.

As a second example, I cast a fairy blight on the local crops and livestock and many people starve that winter...that's the same as running a sword through them isn't it...or is it?

[Blake Hutchins]

Depends on how much you want to apply the folklorish faerie holding to the letter of their bargains, even though they may twist the intent of the contract wildly out of shape.

I sort of like the idea that Otherkind's mere presence might be dangerous to humanity.  Hence if you're not careful, your dangerous beauty may cause inadvertent harm.  Alternatively, the Iron of the world could cause harm, or the worldly aspects of human existence could have an effect on "safety."

Best,

Blake

[Jared A. Sorensen]

Drinking tea with someone, I assign 1 to Life. They fall in love with me during tea and slowly wither and die?

Or would a cutting word (hurting someone emotionally) be enough? Perhaps that's the thing...not just death but hurting someone else intentionally...

[Mike Holmes]

So is it automatically a combat system if someone always might get killed?  Is there some sort of alternative, where you can assign a low die to Other and it doesn't mean you kill them?

Let's not get into semantics. If the only conflicts that you want to focus on have the potential to cause death, fine. Is that what you want, or just an unintended side-effect? Does this say anything about your setting? Can other conflicts occur at all? Do you just use Drama to resolve these?

Mike