The Forge Forums Read-only Archives
The live Forge Forums
|
Articles
|
Reviews
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
June 26, 2022, 12:18:59 AM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes:
Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:
Advanced search
275647
Posts in
27717
Topics by
4285
Members Latest Member:
-
Jason DAngelo
Most online today:
91
- most online ever:
565
(October 17, 2020, 02:08:06 PM)
The Forge Archives
Independent Game Forums
glyphpress
(Moderator:
Joshua A.C. Newman
)
[Shock]
Pages: [
1
]
2
« previous
next »
Author
Topic: [Shock] (Read 30201 times)
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
[Shock]
«
on:
February 19, 2008, 12:21:57 PM »
Logged
Joshua A.C. Newman
Moderator
Member
Posts: 1144
the glyphpress
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #1 on:
February 19, 2008, 01:58:57 PM »
Hi, Morte,
OK, one at a time:
1: Yes, more than one Protag can address and Issue. Just write the other player's name in the same box.
2: That means that they lost their own Intent. If the Antagonist won, that's not the same thing.
3: Let's say there are four of us playing: you, me, Emily, and Eppy. I'm playing your Antagonist. We roll and Emily uses her Minutia die to make you lose. You risk a Feature to get to reroll and we do. Eppy can now use his Minutia die to affect the outcome, but Emily can't because she already used hers up.
4: Naw, it's much simpler than that. You always have two Links. When you risk one and lose it, it comes back as something new. Most of the time, it's an evolution of the previous one. "My children" becomes "my estranged children" for instance.
Cool?
Logged
the glyphpress
's games are
Shock: Social Science Fiction
and
Under the Bed
.
I
design books
like
Dogs in the Vineyard
and
The Mountain Witch
.
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #2 on:
February 19, 2008, 03:07:37 PM »
1/2/4 are cool, thanks. As for 3, it means I've completely misunderstood the whole audience minutiae thing. Going back to try and make sense of it...
Logged
Joshua A.C. Newman
Moderator
Member
Posts: 1144
the glyphpress
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #3 on:
February 19, 2008, 03:11:01 PM »
OK. Lemme know if you need further clarification.
Logged
the glyphpress
's games are
Shock: Social Science Fiction
and
Under the Bed
.
I
design books
like
Dogs in the Vineyard
and
The Mountain Witch
.
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #4 on:
February 20, 2008, 10:05:17 AM »
Logged
Joshua A.C. Newman
Moderator
Member
Posts: 1144
the glyphpress
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #5 on:
February 20, 2008, 10:45:26 AM »
This is right in spirit, but there are some pitfalls:
1: Intents should never really say "and". That gets very confusing. "I inject myself with the serum" is your Intent. All the breaking in stuff we can find out about as we play stuff out, either before or after.
2: The Antagonist *must* use hir biggest d4. It's not an option. I'm not sure if you're sayng it is, but it's not.
3: Groucho is acting correctly. The boo/cheer test is the right way to think about it. The rules assume that you like what you said yourself. The rule is for getting others to buy in or at least trust that you can make the idea enjoyable.
4: When you risk a Link, the Intent is the same, but the relationship to that Link is also implicitly risked. You are correct that Groucho has already used his dice and Chico and Harpo's 1 and 2. Chico's decision is correct and legal.
Cool?
Logged
the glyphpress
's games are
Shock: Social Science Fiction
and
Under the Bed
.
I
design books
like
Dogs in the Vineyard
and
The Mountain Witch
.
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #6 on:
February 20, 2008, 11:30:45 AM »
Quote from: Joshua A.C. Newman on February 20, 2008, 10:45:26 AM
1: Intents should never really say "and". That gets very confusing. "I inject myself with the serum" is your Intent. All the breaking in stuff we can find out about as we play stuff out, either before or after.
So let's say the antagonist is "the government's desire to keep the research program secret". Our protagonist found out about the lab in a previous scene. The protagonist player describes sneaking up to the wire and cutting it, the antagonist talks about dogs, the protagonists throws poison meat, they spin a story (without mechanics intervening) for a while. Eventually the antagonist player decides that he's not just letting the protagonist player narrate his way to success, it's time to throw down. And at this point the protagonist player formally states his intent as "to inject the serum", which is the crucial thing he wants, and the antagonist states some intent too. That gets mechanically resolved with praxis and whatnot, and they can create whatever narrative they like that's consistent with the dice results and the stated intents. [And maybe the audience chip in with their d4(s).]
Is this how it all works?
Quote
2: The Antagonist *must* use hir biggest d4. It's not an option. I'm not sure if you're sayng it is, but it's not.
Yep, got that.
Quote
3: Groucho is acting correctly. The boo/cheer test is the right way to think about it. The rules assume that you like what you said yourself. The rule is for getting others to buy in or at least trust that you can make the idea enjoyable.
So if anybody else at the table strongly agrees with what the participating audience member used their dice to do, it stands? And that includes the *tagonist players (one of whom may benefit/suffer), it's not just a poll of the other audience members?
Quote
4: When you risk a Link, the Intent is the same, but the relationship to that Link is also implicitly risked.
So the protagonist player would leave the "which will" clause out of their stated intent. If it happens that they fail on the second attempt, they need change their link. So they might change it to "publicly disowned the campaign group" and narrate the business about stealing for money being bad PR.
Quote
Cool?
Getting there.
Logged
Joshua A.C. Newman
Moderator
Member
Posts: 1144
the glyphpress
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #7 on:
February 20, 2008, 06:13:58 PM »
Quote
So let's say the antagonist is "the government's desire to keep the research program secret".
Logged
the glyphpress
's games are
Shock: Social Science Fiction
and
Under the Bed
.
I
design books
like
Dogs in the Vineyard
and
The Mountain Witch
.
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #8 on:
February 21, 2008, 04:30:33 AM »
I think I'm about there.
I wrote myself a
rules summary
/ quick reference to use at the game. It might be useful to other people.
Logged
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #9 on:
February 25, 2008, 03:57:03 PM »
Logged
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #10 on:
February 26, 2008, 05:29:24 AM »
b]Is Antagonism (Always) Opposition
Logged
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #11 on:
February 26, 2008, 07:28:04 AM »
The Mexican Standoff and the Reel Around The Fountain
Logged
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #12 on:
February 26, 2008, 10:22:41 AM »
Escalation Woes
Logged
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #13 on:
February 27, 2008, 04:47:02 AM »
On Ownership
Logged
Morte
Member
Posts: 20
Re: [Shock]
«
Reply #14 on:
February 27, 2008, 04:52:57 AM »
Tactical Minutiae Madness
Logged
Pages: [
1
]
2
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Welcome to the Archives
-----------------------------
=> Welcome to the Archives
-----------------------------
General Forge Forums
-----------------------------
=> First Thoughts
=> Playtesting
=> Endeavor
=> Actual Play
=> Publishing
=> Connections
=> Conventions
=> Site Discussion
-----------------------------
Archive
-----------------------------
=> RPG Theory
=> GNS Model Discussion
=> Indie Game Design
-----------------------------
Independent Game Forums
-----------------------------
=> Adept Press
=> Arkenstone Publishing
=> Beyond the Wire Productions
=> Black and Green Games
=> Bully Pulpit Games
=> Dark Omen Games
=> Dog Eared Designs
=> Eric J. Boyd Designs
=> Errant Knight Games
=> Galileo Games
=> glyphpress
=> Green Fairy Games
=> Half Meme Press
=> Incarnadine Press
=> lumpley games
=> Muse of Fire Games
=> ndp design
=> Night Sky Games
=> one.seven design
=> Robert Bohl Games
=> Stone Baby Games
=> These Are Our Games
=> Twisted Confessions
=> Universalis
=> Wild Hunt Studios
-----------------------------
Inactive Forums
-----------------------------
=> My Life With Master Playtest
=> Adamant Entertainment
=> Bob Goat Press
=> Burning Wheel
=> Cartoon Action Hour
=> Chimera Creative
=> CRN Games
=> Destroy All Games
=> Evilhat Productions
=> HeroQuest
=> Key 20 Publishing
=> Memento-Mori Theatricks
=> Mystic Ages Online
=> Orbit
=> Scattershot
=> Seraphim Guard
=> Wicked Press
=> Review Discussion
=> XIG Games
=> SimplePhrase Press
=> The Riddle of Steel
=> Random Order Creations
=> Forge Birthday Forum