Trollbabe barrage of questions: help!

[Moreno R.]

Hi!

The Italian edition of Trollbabe was published ten days ago, translated by me, and now people are asking all kind of questions in our forum about the rules. Some I can answer (often because I asked the same thing to Ron while translating the book), but others are questions I never though of before. I can make some supposition about the answers, but I think it's better to be sure and ask here...

1) A Trollbabe can stay in the same place at the end of an adventure? (the example made in the original question was about a trollbabe that increased scale staying always in the same place, increasing her influence and power, but I am interested in a more general answer, both with increasing scale and with fixed scale)

2) The "Free and Clear" stage happen before every CONFLICT or before every SERIES? Because from the diagram on page 40 of the English edition it would seem that there is only one fair and clear stage, but in the example on page 50-51 it seems that the GM and the player have a new fair and clear phase at the beginning of every series (until now I played with only one formal fair and clear phase every conflict, but the question made me doubt this)

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Moreno,

You scared me! But fortunately this was very mild compared to a true barrage of Roncucci questions, as I know.

1. No. The requirement is to say where your trollbabe is going, implying travel. She may want to stay in a particular place, and maybe she even does live there ordinarily, but the next adventure must concern her going somewhere else even if it is only briefly, or intended to be only briefly. An alternative idea is that she is traveling involuntarily.

2. Technically, the Free and Clear occurs before every conflict. Although it is not absolutely required before every Series after the first, sometimes a little bit of dialogue before a given Series can help orient all the people involved. In the example, I'm seeing statements of intention and effort which serve this purpose. Notice that they are not quite the same as genuine, initial Free and Clear statements, because they are embedded within a current conflict with fictional events already established and Goals which are in a state of genuine flux rather than merely being intended. These limitations usually make such statements easier and briefer than some Free and Clear dialogue, as well as being less subject to revision.

Best, Ron

[Moreno R.]

Hi Ron!

You scared me! But fortunately this was very mild compared to a true barrage of Roncucci questions, as I know.

The barrage was directed at me this time (I know, there is a certain karma in this...), I simply passed along the ones I didn't think to ask before...

1. No. The requirement is to say where your trollbabe is going, implying travel. She may want to stay in a particular place, and maybe she even does live there ordinarily, but the next adventure must concern her going somewhere else even if it is only briefly, or intended to be only briefly. An alternative idea is that she is traveling involuntarily.

This prompt other questions...

1) The trollbabe can return to a place she already visited?

2) When the Scale of the trollbabe increase, and the Stakes are about entire lands, the trollbabe must travel outside of the land, or it's enough that she is in another location?

[Ron Edwards]

1) The trollbabe can return to a place she already visited?

Sure! All preparation rules apply in full.

2) When the Scale of the trollbabe increase, and the Stakes are about entire lands, the trollbabe must travel outside of the land, or it's enough that she is in another location?

This looks like an example of trying to make rules more complicated than they are. A location on the map is any location on the map. That doesn't have anything to do with Scale. Let's say a trollbabe is a chief of a large area that includes several recognizable features on the map. She can travel from place to place within her domain.

In my previous answer, I stated that she has to go somewhere away from her current location. That's true. It does not mean that she has to leave the range of influence of her Scale.

Best, Ron

[Moreno R.]

Thanks! Now it's cleat.

The barrage is continuing. These are the latest shots fired at me...

1) The use of Magic outside of a conflict is a source of confusion (or, at least, different opinions about it). I assume as a given that, outside of conflicts, the trollbabe can use Magic in any "colorful" way she wants (for example, the player can describe the trollbabe appearing in a puff of smoke right at the start of the adventure, or arriving in an island after having passed the sea, on foot, at the bottom. Even If I like a less showy and more mysterious use of magic, it would the the player's choice.).
The problem arrive when the trollbabe try to use magic, outside of conflicts, on things at a bigger scale than the adventure.
The case in example was a trollbabe that, to get to a pirate ship without getting wet, made a "ten commandments style parting of the water" on a very big mass of water. Much higher than her in Scale.  Seeing that she would have failed automatically if someone had called a conflict about it, can she do it automatically if nobody call a conflict?

2) In case someone had called a conflict in that situation, and the objective of the trollbabe is not "part the water" (that is outside of her scale) but simply "getting on the ship without getting wet". So in this case the parting of the sea would be a narration of success from the GM. Seeing that the objective (getting there) was at her scale or lower, and anything over that scale is under the authority of the GM, the GM can narrate a "colorful" parting of the sea to let the trollbabe pass? 

3) Same situation, but the player want to narrate the parting of the sea (or anything on a similar scale) to describe her trollbabe's defeat (maybe she did get to part the sea, but someone distract her and the spell crashes with her in the middle of the closing waters). I doubt very much this is allowed, but it doesn't hurt asking to be sure...

4) Another question about the location of an adventure: can it be on another plane of reality, or in any place not on the mapped world? (the actual play case: in one adventure I GM'd the trollbabe went to the "lower planes" to get herself an army of undead, subjugating their king and taking the army as a relationship. In that case, the adventure started and ended on a location of the map, where the "portal" was situated. But what if that player, in another adventure, describe the trollbabe right on that plane?

[Moreno R.]

Another question to add to the four above:

5) What happen if a trollbabe use magic to bring to herself another trollbabe, who is in the middle of another adventure? (the original question was about "the nearer trollbabe", but I would like to know the answer even in the case the player name a specific trollbabe)

As you can see, my barrage of questions during the translation wasn't so over the top, regarding "strange questions that people will ask..."

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Moreno,

The problem with your barrage of questions is that it exposed multiple errors, misstatements, inconsistencies, and bad choices on my part. I am still recovering.

These, on the other hand, are no problem at all.

1) The use of Magic outside of a conflict is a source of confusion (or, at least, different opinions about it). I assume as a given that, outside of conflicts, the trollbabe can use Magic in any "colorful" way she wants (for example, the player can describe the trollbabe appearing in a puff of smoke right at the start of the adventure, or arriving in an island after having passed the sea, on foot, at the bottom. Even If I like a less showy and more mysterious use of magic, it would the the player's choice.).

As long as it accomplishes nothing that is counter to any other character's interests, that is correct. However, I have a hard time imagining such a thing. If she arrives in a puff of smoke at the immediate start of an adventure, that is OK. But if she arrives in the middle of some kind of conflict or problem, then it's participating in a conflict. As GM, I would interpret the announcement that "I arrive in a puff of smoke" as begging for a conflict, especially since the player did not state some kind of destination, so the destination and circumstances of arrival are my choice. I would make that choice very, very problematic for the trollbabe, and I would instantly call a conflict. Therefore the statement would be the first part of a Fair & Clear phase, in which I would be very harsh concerning what various NPCs are doing and how their activities would disrupt the trollbabe's magic and make it do something quite terrible.

What I am really saying, at a more general level, is that the player should be more specific about what the character is actually doing. Where are they? What are they literally physically doing? Where are they trying to go, in a puff of smoke, and why? What do they want to accomplish by doing this? A great deal of the time, the answer will imply a conflict. If it doesn't, or if it's too vague, then I can make it a conflict. If the player really and truly only wants to have the trollbabe be in the designated area and wants a little dramatic magic to have the arrival be colorful, then the player should be explicit about this by how the trollbabe's actions and dialogue are described. I might be OK with that. And I could still, if I wanted, make a conflict out of it.

"I want to arrive secretly and safely."

"Conflict!"

The problem arrive when the trollbabe try to use magic, outside of conflicts, on things at a bigger scale than the adventure.
The case in example was a trollbabe that, to get to a pirate ship without getting wet, made a "ten commandments style parting of the water" on a very big mass of water. Much higher than her in Scale. Seeing that she would have failed automatically if someone had called a conflict about it, can she do it automatically if nobody call a conflict?

Let's clarify slightly: if it were an ordinary conflict, then no, she would not automatically fail at her Goal. "Parting the waters" is not a Goal, it's some kind of trapping or color concerning a Goal. This strikes me as identical to my example with the giant gates. Her Goal is to get to the ship without getting wet, and that's a perfectly wonderful Personal-Scale Goal. Fine. She casts a spell to part the waters. That is also fine. Let's say she succeeds - who's narrating? You are, the GM, and all you have to do is narrate something that gets her there without getting wet, that involves her magic, that does not violate the Scale. That is actually not very hard at all.

You're getting sucked into task-thinking, or even worse, God damned fucking stupid abominable Stakes-thinking (well, 99.9% of the time; there are a couple game designs which use it well), which is to say, pre-narrating something and rolling to see if that's exactly how it happens. That is not Trollbabe. The narration of what actually happens is not the same as what the trollbabe is trying to do, even if she succeeds. Especially and by definition if she succeeds, if her efforts exceed her Scale.

As far as whether she can do it without a conflict, that's not a possibility either. By announcing something of this sort, the GM is almost absolutely constrained to call a conflict about it. That would be an extreme case of my "swim across the ocean" example, in which the constraint was not quite as binding. But this one is binding.

"I part the waters to split the ocean before me!"

"Conflict!" (and then we go into it with the same point applying - that success would mean the GM narrates, and it's part of his or her job to keep the success within the right Scale)

2) In case someone had called a conflict in that situation, and the objective of the trollbabe is not "part the water" (that is outside of her scale) but simply "getting on the ship without getting wet". So in this case the parting of the sea would be a narration of success from the GM. Seeing that the objective (getting there) was at her scale or lower, and anything over that scale is under the authority of the GM, the GM can narrate a "colorful" parting of the sea to let the trollbabe pass?

No. See above. The GM can narrate anything that's consistent with what's been said in Fair & Clear, and consistent with success at the Goal, but not above the trollbabe's Scale. Use your imagination and remember that magic is magical, and hence full of unexpected events.
I mean, it could be as simple as saying that the sea parts only enough for her at any given time, so it's clearly a Personal effect she's generated and not any kind of "I command the whole of the mighty waters" effect. See, it wasn't hard at all.

3) Same situation, but the player want to narrate the parting of the sea (or anything on a similar scale) to describe her trollbabe's defeat (maybe she did get to part the sea, but someone distract her and the spell crashes with her in the middle of the closing waters). I doubt very much this is allowed, but it doesn't hurt asking to be sure...

Wait a minute ... OK, I am going to assume that the Goal is still the Personal one of getting to the ship without getting wet. So, the player fails and ... well, then we have to know how badly. Inconvenienced? Injured? Incapacitated? The difference does not automatically define the Scale of what might happen to her, but it's very hard to discuss narrations without knowing. But I will try.

Would it be OK for the player to say that the ocean crashes upon her and inundates her with all that water? Certainly! That's the ocean doing something, not her magic.

I can say for sure that your parenthetical suggestion is not correct, because she didn't get to part the sea.

4) Another question about the location of an adventure: can it be on another plane of reality, or in any place not on the mapped world? (the actual play case: in one adventure I GM'd the trollbabe went to the "lower planes" to get herself an army of undead, subjugating their king and taking the army as a relationship. In that case, the adventure started and ended on a location of the map, where the "portal" was situated. But what if that player, in another adventure, describe the trollbabe right on that plane?

No. This is not Planescape. The rule says, "a location on the map," and that's the real rule.

Also, during the adventure with the lower planes and undead, the player may have violated the "no new information" rule. If the GM had established the portal and existence of the undead something-or-other, then that would be all right, but not otherwise. Players have absolutely no authority over setting and back-story in this game, and most especially not through narrating dice outcomes. This is not a "roll dice to dominate creative input" system.

5) What happen if a trollbabe use magic to bring to herself another trollbabe, who is in the middle of another adventure? (the original question was about "the nearer trollbabe", but I would like to know the answer even in the case the player name a specific trollbabe)

This is actually pretty cool. "Go to the nearest trollbabe" is in fact a viable Goal for a Magic conflict. I think that would be non-problematic, although it would be a conflict, because I as GM would make it my business to narrate the outcome as disadvantageously and undesirably as possible. I wouldn't specify how, because there is no pre-narration in the game, but I would call the conflict and explain myself, if necessary, that I have every intention of narrating the outcome as exceptionally against the trollbabe's interests, and that automatically requires a conflict roll.

Best, Ron

[Moreno R.]

Hi Ron!

I will try to digest these answers and, more importantly, to translate them in Italian, to see if there are more questions. But before that, I want to explain better the question #5

5) What happen if a trollbabe use magic to bring to herself another trollbabe, who is in the middle of another adventure? (the original question was about "the nearer trollbabe", but I would like to know the answer even in the case the player name a specific trollbabe)

This is actually pretty cool. "Go to the nearest trollbabe" is in fact a viable Goal for a Magic conflict. I think that would be non-problematic, although it would be a conflict, because I as GM would make it my business to narrate the outcome as disadvantageously and undesirably as possible. I wouldn't specify how, because there is no pre-narration in the game, but I would call the conflict and explain myself, if necessary, that I have every intention of narrating the outcome as exceptionally against the trollbabe's interests, and that automatically requires a conflict roll.

I would not have had any problem with a trollbabe teleporting herself to another trollbabe's side (I think it would be a simple variant of "leaving the adventure" and "entering another trollbabe's adventure", right?). The problem is that the player wanted to teleport ANOTHER trollbabe, to his trollbabe's side. Taking, by force, another trollbabe from another adventure.

The actual play example where this happened had a trollbabe calling (forcing a teleport) of another trollbabe right to her side simply to demonstrate to a mob that she was not unique.  It was a situation so riddled with errors (there were vague declared objectives, new information in the middle of a conflict, etc.) to be easily rejected, but it leaves open the general question: what can do a GM if a player do something like this as an objective in a magic conflict.

[Moreno R.]

Adding to the still dangling question #5 above...

6) one issue that did come up in some discussions about trollbabe was about what "scale" means, in the fiction, regarding what the trollbabe can do. (with magic, in particular)

- the trollbabe is learning and is becoming more powerful (or learn more powerful spells) as time go on? (the scale of the trollbabe's magic is a known quality in the fiction)
- Or she, in the fiction, already know more powerful magic, but "it happen" that she don't do anything too big at the beginning? As in The trollbabe know that she can use spells above her scale, but the player know that she will fail in their use? (the scale has no meaning in the fiction, but only at the player's level)
- Or this matter is left completely to the narration and the fiction created during the game?

7) Another question posted in the forum: let's say that two trollbabes are at scale 7, and they are in the same land, but they did choose two different locations on the map inside of the land. The stakes must be very high: for example, for one of them it could be the fate of the entire kingdom. But the other trollbabe is inside that same kingdom, too..
- It's possible for the GM to use the same stakes for the other trollbabe, too, making they play in the same adventure? (at this Scale, they probably have entire armies and cities as relationship...)
- If the other trollbabe is inside the land that is at stake, MUST the GM use the same stakes, or the second trollbabe can play an independent adventure? (the problem here is that what the first trollbabe do to the kingdom will have consequences on the other trollbabe)

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Moreno,

Please tell everyone at the forum thank you for their interest in my game! I appreciate all the questions.

Also, for those reading here, I want to clarify my earlier post about Moreno's questions to me. I was referring to the questions he asked when translating the game into Italian. They were very humbling questions because basically, he found every imaginable shortcoming of design and presentation. I insisted he be included as an editor credit because without him, the text would be gravely deficient.

On to the questions.

5. To transport another trollbabe from some unknown location to one's side ... that is a very interesting question as well. I have never thought about it. So I will simply try to apply the written rules.

I think this is two conflicts, not one. The first conflict is acting against the interests of the other trollbabe, and then the second would be convincing the crowd (or rather, if successful, one person in the crowd). The more I think about it, the more this makes sense.

Considering Scale first, the Personal works fine for the first conflict. Or if you disagree considering the distance involved, then I suggest narrating a success as opening a visual portal to show the other trollbabe, which still achieves the Goal ("bring her here") without violating the distance limitation that a particular GM might like to impose.

However, convincing a whole crowd is definitely above her Scale. This issue is easily solved with the ordinary rules about this, by having the GM narrate that only one person is genuinely convinced. (The others may be either un-convinced or merely uncertain. After all, this magic being just conjured up something. It's probably a trick!)

I was going to write some more about this example, but given those applications of the rules, I don't see any further problem with it. If she succeeds in the Magic roll, the other trollbabe appears. If she succeeds in the convincing roll, one person in the crowd is convinced. The opportunities for negative repercussions in both cases are immense. The opportunities for fun outcomes of failed rolls are also immense. (If I were the player and failed the Magic roll, I'd love to pop my trollbabe into the other adventure instead! Whoops!)

The GM should have no trouble with the "abandoned" adventure. The rules about how to deal with an adventure when a trollbabe departs are pretty clear, I think.

I want to stress that such an act does not violate the social or creative contract of play. I want to shout, loudly, that Trollbabe adventures are not D&D adventure modules. There is no mandated policy or expectation to "run a character through" an adventure.

6. Regarding the in-fiction meaning of increasing Scale, I am reluctant to say "either in-fiction improvement or revealed prior ability." That's true, but it's not the answer, and I am wary that saying that as the answer will ultimately be misleading.

The real answer is that you don't have to explain it. In the kind of comics and stories that inspire Trollbabe, such explanations are rare or absent. If you want to say that she learns better magic, you can; and if you want to say that she's known how to do this all along, you can. But the real answer is that if you don't want to, you don't have to say (or know!) a damned thing about it. And furthermore, any of these three options can be utilized at any time for one's character.

I recommend cultivating this mind-set in order to develop the fullest aesthetic appreciation of the game's rules and effects.

7. I don't see any problem with your proposed situation. No one said that one trollbabe's adventure isn't supposed to affect another's situation or adventure. They may share the adventure with the same Stakes, or they may have two different adventures, as the GM decides.

Best, Ron

[Moreno R.]

Thanks!

I never thought about Scale limiting the range of a spell. I always assumed that it limited only the area of effect (the target). But it make sense. I don't think that the range is exactly the same as the scale, however, because in that case the trollbabe's magic at range 1 would work only on herself and people she can touch.  What is the limit of range you use with every step of the scale?

Do you limit the duration of magic, too?

Meanwhile, another question popped up in the forum:

This happened during an adventure where the thing at stake was a woman, with a jealous husband. During a scene, the husband strangled the woman, with the trollbabe present, but totally indifferent to the crime.
- First question: the GM should have called a conflict? The trollbabe stated that she was doing nothing, so it was a conflict between two npc only.

After the murderer left the scene, the trollbabe went near to the corpse... and made a spell to resurrect the woman!
- Second question: it was a valid objective? How would have you played it as the GM?

[Ron Edwards]

Wait one moment - I think you may have mis-read my reply a little bit. As a Trollbabe GM, I do not use range and duration as Scale-driven considerations for Magic conflicts. Please do not take that part of my reply as canonical instruction!

I included it strictly to serve a GM who might not like a wide-open interpretation of such issues for Trollbabe magic. The rules make it possible to interpret "I swim across the ocean" as a conflict because the ocean is very big, and some people might be more comfortable using the same logic for magic. Whether this is mediated strictly in Scale terms is probably a matter for interpretation, although I wouldn't think so.

Again, this concept is a side point for a possible case and should not be blown out of proportion. My standards for GMing Trollbabe magic are precisely and only those explained in the book, which is true because I wrote those standards as a direct description of how I use the rules.

Regarding your questions,

This happened during an adventure where the thing at stake was a woman, with a jealous husband. During a scene, the husband strangled the woman, with the trollbabe present, but totally indifferent to the crime.
- First question: the GM should have called a conflict? The trollbabe stated that she was doing nothing, so it was a conflict between two npc only.

The GM should not call a conflict in situations like this. In fact, by definition, he or she cannot do so. In rules terms, it is not a conflict at all, merely narration of events as depicte in the "cycle" diagram that only has conflicts as a subroutine, which in this case would not be used.

After the murderer left the scene, the trollbabe went near to the corpse... and made a spell to resurrect the woman!
- Second question: it was a valid objective? How would have you played it as the GM?

This is not only valid Goal for a Magic act and conflict, it is beautiful, wonderful, and exciting. I want to hug and kiss the player - well, I might look first - but I bet I would!

For one thing, the possibilities for narrating the outcomes are endless, success or failure. I'd almost look forward to a severe failure in order to see what the player came up with, e.g. creating a terrible undead avenger, or a possessor ghost who enters the trollbabe. And with success, the GM has a fascinating new character concept handed to him or her on a silver platter. But even this is only a facet of a bigger, more important point.

You see, the real topic is not "what is a conflict" or "is this a valid conflict," which are easy, but the Stakes of the adventure. If the trollbabe had not tried to resurrect the woman and simply left her dead, then the adventure would be past its final Pivot point. All the GM does now is describe some characters' reactions and some consequences of the murder, and the story is over. But given the attempt, and the nigh-certain fact that something will certainly come of it, the story is now thrown into a fascinating, wide-open, practically newly-created form with miles to go before that Pivot. That's what a trollbabe does best - makes the potential story in a given place into a wholly new story.

Best, Ron

[Moreno R.]

Hi Ron!

New questions!

1) A trollbabe evoked, by way of a magic conflict, the (not named) guardian tiger of an enemy of her. After she won that conflict (with the tiger near her) she took the tiger as a relationship.

The Tiger at that time was hostile to the trollbabe, to the GM called a conflict (after the request of the relationship) to see if the trollbabe could tame the beast. Failing that roll, the trollbabe still got the tiger as a relationship, but as an enemy, not as an ally as the player wanted.

When this actual play was posted, it provoked some discussions about what the GM did.  After the trollbabe player asked the "ally" relationship (with the tiger still very much hostile) the GM should have given her free rein to dictate what her new relationship (the tiger) would do, letting the trollbabe tame her without rolling? The relationship is given to the trollbabe at the exact moment she request it, or only when it occur in the fiction?

2) Tied to the situation described above: the trollbabe player can ask for a "relationship" with a not named character, and then the exact kind of relationship is decided during the scene, or the player have to say "I want her/him as an ally/lover/friend/enemy/whatever" at the start?

3) Another game, another player: reading the game manual, and seeing on page 92 this text...
The second bit is a matter of simple
announcement. If a scene has begun,
and you want your trollbabe there, and if
there's no overwhelming logistic reason
for her not to get there as she pleases,
then she's there
...asked if his trollbabe could simply "hop" between two active adventures, simply appearing in the other trollbabe's scenes and then returning (by magic, I suppose) to her own, playing two adventures at the same time.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Moreno,

1. The GM broke the rules by calling a conflict with the tiger. The correct sequence is:

i) Conduct a conflict with an NPC or with him or her implicated somehow.
ii) Say "I'm forming a Relationship" and what kind.
iii) Role-play some interaction illustrating that Relationship.

(iii) is entirely subordinated to (ii). If the GM didn't want the tiger to become a Relationship, then he or she should have given the tiger a name.

2. The text the player was reading was intended to apply within a single adventure. There are ways for trollbabes to cross adventures, as we've discussed before, but this particular interpretation is not one of them.

Best, Ron

[Moreno R.]

Hi Ron!

(iii) is entirely subordinated to (ii). If the GM didn't want the tiger to become a Relationship, then he or she should have given the tiger a name.

The GM can give a name to a NPC created during the course of the adventure, or he is limited to the ones that had a name from the start?

For example, let's say that the Tiger was created by the GM narrating the defeat of the trollbabe (incapacitated and losing the last roll).  In the following scenes, the tiger get characterized as a trustworthy ally of his master. The GM can give her a name, but it's a "Name" like the ones decided at the creation of the adventure, avoiding having her taken as an ally by the trollbabe, or not?

And what if the trollbabe want to get the tiger as a relationship before the name is used in the game? (between the time the GM decided to give the tiger a name and any occasion where that name could be used)