[Shock]

[Morte]

Framing Final Conflicts

[Morte]

Well, that's all the questions I had after the first session. The next game is due in just under two weeks.

If anybody can clarify all the things I asked about in the preceding posts, I'd be most grateful.

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Morte, I don't have time just now to read this thoroughly, but I'm really excited to do so soon.

I didn't want you to think I'd forgotten you!

[Morte]

i]book<

[Morte]

[Morte]

[newsalor]

Escalation Woes<

IMHO both the official Shock 1.1. escalation/fulcrum -rule and your addition are redundant.

You and your fellow players are supposed to make your choices based on what you think is cool. So if all your friends agree that escalation is massively fun and that they like those kinds of stories, then limiting their options won't make the game more fun for them.

The conflict resolutions have all kinds of nifty doodads attached, but essentially it's a kinda voting / bidding mechanism that's supposed to produce a compromise that rocks all of your boats. Trust the market! If you guys like certain kinds of outcomes, then I guess everyone will be placing their votes to ensure that you get the maximum enjoyment out of the game.

[Nocker]

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Bonjour, Nocker. Let's see if we can get these straightened out.

My questions
a) In a scene, how many players can play their Protagonist ? Only one ? Any number ? And what if a conflict involves more than one *Tagonist ? The example shows Thorium and Phosphorus being in conflict together, but what if Father was also involved ?Quote

b) If players come up with, say, 4 Issues, and the 4 Protagonists happens to adress only 2 of them (by pair), how to use - if they are to be use - the remaining Issues ? Do they have an impact ? If they don't, won't the players who own each one feel pulled aside ? Because, each player should own at least one Shock or Issue, but it's possible to have multiple Protagonists that adress one Issue.Quote

c) What is the goal of having an Owner if everything must pass the Boo/Cheer test to be accepted ? And in a Boo/Cheer test for a Minutia, who get the priority between the players that don't want it, and the players that are enthusiastic about it ?

The "Boo/Cheer" rule doesn't apply to Owned things. Enthusiastic players always take priority. That's an important rule in Shock: actually, and is one of those "personal perspective leaking into design" things.

1) We want to know how far does the Intents need to be non-exclusive. Morte made hir own conclusion about that, but it's interesting to know your point of view. And further, I'd like to add : what if an Intent makes irrelevant a *Tagonist's previously won Intent, that is, an Intent zie won on a previous scene ?

Intents can't contradict each other. They are orthogonal. If it's possible for them to both succeed, both fail, or for each to succeed while the other fails, it's cool. You can certainly fuck up someone else's success. The game's all about that.

2) For the priority of the declaration of the Intents, what is the rule ? Is the set of rules Morte came up with is satisfying (Protagonist decide who says first hir Intent, then the second has the responsability to state an Intent that is non-exclusive, and then each can change hir Intent once, after hearing the other's) ? What did you use, in your games ?

You can't change your Intent once it's said. Protag goes first. On rare occasion, I've bent that rule because an Antag player couldn't keep it in his pants, but that's the rule. This puts the Protag at a disadvantage because the job of the Antag is to twist. It's to ask, "Do you want that enough if.... this is the consequence?"

3) As stated Morte, the Story Goal resolution rules are a bit confusing. First, I can't understand what you mean on the page 42, saying "there must be only one result that yields a positive result to the Story Goal". Do this forbid a final conflict with both *Tagonists has an opposed Intent. For example "The robots destroy the tape, and make the truth hidden forever" versus "I put the tape in the player and reveal all the conspiration to the citizens" is possible ?

Of course. You can never have opposed Intents. The hairiness gets into play, though, when the Story Goal can be satisfied with either player. So, hypothetically:

Quote

4) What happens if both *Tagonists fail their Intent in the final scene ? It seems that the Story Goal can't be accomplished, or will be very weakly accomplished. Is it re-played in the next scene ? Don't this artificially lengthen the story ?

Nope. No do-overs! That means that Intents were not stated strongly enough. Somehow, you got to this point without having the final choices mean anything. This is a question that will only come up hypothetically.

5) To what extend a Minutia can be persistent ? Can it be a short event that change only the outcome of the current scene ? Can it be a thing that makes irrelevant a previously stated Minutia ? Can it be a thing that affects the Links of a *Tagonist, or hir Features ?Quote

6) Corollary, are all declarations and explications of the Audience (particularly those who support a d4 or explain an escalation) necessarily Minutiae ? Or only the elements that explain the setting can be Minutiae ?Quote

7) Do the d4 of the Audience can trigger an escalation, or is an escalation triggered only when a *Tagonist's d10 minus/plus the other's d4 equals the Fulcra ?

The Audience is usually the reason Escalation happens.

Why don't have less Issues (so that more Protagonist will adress each) and one or two more Shocks, will this make the game less interesting, or less structured ? Why this choice of numerous Issues and only one Shock ?

Lots of Shocks, if they haven't grown together organically, just make a Crazy Future Land with angels, superpowers, and star travel. However, if you grow them together from story to story, they fit thematically. If you were to very carefully choose a single Issue, then carefully choose Shocks that work well together, it should work fine. But too many of both makes a sort of idea salad, when what you want is more like carefully arranged sushi.

9) What are the criterias to decide when an Antagonist player should declare the final scene ? What do you think is the better moment for the resolution, in general ?

The Antagonist has enough Credits to last three or, at most, four scenes. Sometimes, the ending of a particular Protagonist's story happens in scene 2. That's fine. The best moment for resolution is when it's very clear what the choice will be that the player will have to make: do I escape from the Apes, or will it have been Earth all along? Do I save the last ecology of Earth, or do I live to experience it?

[Nocker]

Okay, all your answers are clear and satisfy me. All but one. Isn't it a pretty score ?

I definetly did't understand the first answer, on the number of *Tagonists in a scene and multi*Tagonist conflicts.
Also, I suspect I haven't made enough explicit the first part, because you seem to miss my point.

So :
First, imagine a table (G = gamer, P = Protag, A = Antag) : G1 is playing P1 and A3, G2 is playing P2 and A1, G3 is playing P3 and A2.

Must a scene place only one Protag at a time in the center of the story ? Are the others only Minutiae, or can they be also Protags ? If not, this means that the classic "PJ group" is totally impossible in a Shock game. No Protags can ally or confront in a scene ?

Secondly, you seem to have written an auxiliary rule that enables the multi-*Tagonists conflict. But I couldn't understand what do you meant with your Who Art in Heaven example. May you retry to explain me this modification ?

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Must a scene place only one Protag at a time in the center of the story ?

At the center, yes. Other characters can be there, of course.

Are the others only Minutiae, or can they be also Protags ?

If there's a conflict between one Protag and another, that's OK. Note that it messes with the Antag's Credits and will tend to make the Protag get hosed by the end.

It's a game about alienation, you dig.

If not, this means that the classic "PJ group" is totally impossible in a Shock game. No Protags can ally or confront in a scene ?

They can ally, of course. There are no restrictions in this regard on the actions of characters. The dice they get to add are the (very powerful, I might add) Minutia dice.

But if it's not their scene, by definition, they're not at the center of it.

[Nocker]

Oh my !

You clarified all that was obscured in my head. Now I can play with great pleasure at your game.

Thanks a lot, and again congratulation. Your game isn't only the best Social Science Fiction RPG, but the best Story-focused RPG.

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Wow! Thanks!