Trollbabe vs Trollbabe

[Moreno R.]

A question that did come up in the Italian forum:

Two Trollbabes are fighting against each other. The situation is the one addressed in page 83 (page 132 of the Italian edition): "More extreme: when they fight"

The conflict is a "fighting" one, the pace is "entire conflict"

Trollbabe A (Kalima) has the goal "immobilize Myrna"
Trollbabe B (Myrna) has the goal "K.O. Kalima senseless"

The first question is: these kind of goals combine with the reroll results, or not? I mean, if Kalima end the conflict after failing the second re-roll she is senseless... even if Myrna failed in her conflict to render Kalima senseless? Or the conflict win-lose results trump the re-roll consequences?

The second question: let's say that Kalima make her first roll, and succeed. She will immobilize Myrne, and the GM will narrate how.  Then Myrna fail her first roll. She is inconvenienced, she still has not K.O. Kalima, and she will narrate why.
Now, if Myrna want to try a reroll.. how do the narration go? I mean, Kalima's "victory" is narrated, then Myrna can go on with her rerolls (she is not senseless, she is only immobilized, and she could use relationships) with Myrna's actions simply narrated as if she was an NPC opponent (without rolling), or the narration of Kalima's victory is on "hold" until Myrna finish her series of rerolls, and we know if she was able to knock Karina senseless or not, then both are narrated?

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Moreno,

The re-roll results are 100% valid and need to be accounted for in the narrations. So are the Goals!

The important thing to remember is that if a stated Goal in Trollbabe is not met, anything that literally must occur if it is not met, must occur ... but nothing else is mandated. This can be confusing to people who are over-trained in the "stakes" technique. They might think that because Myrna fails, Kalima cannot end up senseless in any way whatsoever; i.e., that Myrna's failing somehow provides a cocoon of "not knocked senseless" around Kalima. Whereas, of course she can, because all Myrna's failure dictates is that she fails to knock Kalima senseless.

So to clarify point by point.

1. If Myrna fails to knock Kalima senseless, but Kalima fails her re-rolls to the extent that she is incapacitated, then the results are (i) Kalima is unconscious, but not due to Myrna hitting her; and (ii) Myrna is (clearly) not immobilized. This should not be hard if you follow the narration rules very strictly throughout the course of the re-roll diagram.

2. This problem is simply a matter of timing. The rule is that both conflicts must be played out in full mechanically. How their re-rolls, if any, are timed relative to one another is a matter of local finesse. For instance, when Kalima successfully immobilizes Myrna, the narration at that moment establishes that success but also must leave some opportunity for Myrna to finish her conflict. It doesn't have to be as extreme as your "on hold" phrasing suggests. As you point out, if Relationships are involved, that is pretty easy and doesn't have to concede any mobility to Myrna even temporarily.

The big point is that when two trollbabes clash like this, one cannot pre-empt or "simply" beat the other through cleverly stating a Goal that obviates the other's, and winning it "first." That's a predictable dodge, using logic like, "Well, if she's immobilized, she obviously can't hit me, so her whole conflict goes away." Nope. Not in Trollbabe. When two trollbabes try to do things at once, in conflict, both Goals are mechanically on the table, not subject to cancellation. You will all have to narrate accordingly.

Best, Ron

I don't understand the part about narrating her actions as if she were an NPC. She's a player-character and her actions would be narrated and played normally.

[Moreno R.]

Hi Ron!

I don't understand the part about narrating her actions as if she were an NPC. She's a player-character and her actions would be narrated and played normally.

Disregard that phrasing, it was only a way to say "without rolling dice", but it was a confusing way to explain a simpler concept.

The important thing to remember is that if a stated Goal in Trollbabe is not met, anything that literally must occur if it is not met, must occur ... but nothing else is mandated. This can be confusing to people who are over-trained in the "stakes" technique. They might think that because Myrna fails, Kalima cannot end up senseless in any way whatsoever; i.e., that Myrna's failing somehow provides a cocoon of "not knocked senseless" around Kalima. Whereas, of course she can, because all Myrna's failure dictates is that she fails to knock Kalima senseless.

Thanks, now the concept is clear, my doubts now are about the possibility of combining results in any possible situation (without breaking the "no new informations" rule).

Example: Tina and Clara are fighting. They have the same goal, to KO senseless the other one. Pace: entire conflict. They are alone.  They are unarmed. They both state in the fair and clear phase that they are circling each other keeping a cautious fighting stance, waiting for an opening, and then strike with their fist. They both fail the first two rolls (they both use the geographic feature and the handy object... using trees as cover, throwing sand in the eye, nothing that change the overall situation) so they are both wounded (they hit each other with enough force to break their noses)  Then they both lose the third rolls.

They both must be senseless at the end, but not because of what the other did, and without narrating new informations (as new characters entering the scene and capturing both).

If I don't want to narrate a couple of trollbabes tripping on their laces and knocking themselves out, can I narrate that someone arrive and capture them both when they too tired for the fight, or this would be a violation of the "no new information" rule?  Can one or both of them narrate the same thing (with some other other NPC of their choice) if they win the last roll?

2. This problem is simply a matter of timing. The rule is that both conflicts must be played out in full mechanically. How their re-rolls, if any, are timed relative to one another is a matter of local finesse. For instance, when Kalima successfully immobilizes Myrna, the narration at that moment establishes that success but also must leave some opportunity for Myrna to finish her conflict. It doesn't have to be as extreme as your "on hold" phrasing suggests. As you point out, if Relationships are involved, that is pretty easy and doesn't have to concede any mobility to Myrna even temporarily.

The big point is that when two trollbabes clash like this, one cannot pre-empt or "simply" beat the other through cleverly stating a Goal that obviates the other's, and winning it "first." That's a predictable dodge, using logic like, "Well, if she's immobilized, she obviously can't hit me, so her whole conflict goes away." Nope. Not in Trollbabe. When two trollbabes try to do things at once, in conflict, both Goals are mechanically on the table, not subject to cancellation. You will all have to narrate accordingly.

To be really sure: this mean that Kalima's success is narrated at the time she rolls it, and then her player say what Kalima's to to avoid getting knocked out by Myrna's re-rolls, and Myra's player has to use the fact that Kalima already immobilized Myrna when she narrates what happen to get that reroll?

If Myrna's player can't so that using Myrna (immobilized) and there is no relationship to use in the scene, can she narrate in director stance something that not require to play a character (for example, that Myrna's sword lie hidden in the grass and Kalima could trip on it), or something in flashback (for example, that Myrna prepared a "remembered spell" before that would be triggered by her capture)?

If not, how can he do it?