Topic: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Started by: Zak Arntson
Started on: 3/27/2004
Board: Actual Play
On 3/27/2004 at 7:08pm, Zak Arntson wrote:
[Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
A week ago I played in Jay Loomis' Gallant. a game of swashbuckling adventure. Now, swashbuckling is a loaded term, so I'll stop using it right ... now.
We engaged in a week of emails before play, working out our various characters and their backstory. The idea is that you a background before doing anything else, which can be anything from a sentence to a couple paragraphs. Here's mine:
Benigno, born Audrey-Alexandro Labouret was born to minor nobility on the isle of Seresca, living an early life in court. His adolescence was marred by civil war, which taught him the horrors of battle and earned the unremitting contempt of his older brother, who bested him in every way. When the war ended, Benigno proposed to his childhood sweetheart, Marie, only to find his bride-to-be slinking off to visit his brother, and on the night before their wedding! He left that night, secretly, by boat and joined the royal guard to lose his past. When he caught word of the promotion of his brother to Count of the Isle, and a subsequent wedding between Marie and the Count, he further descended into drink and debauchery; Benigno soon desired only the moment, caught up in the passion of battle, comraderie or a woman's arms, peppered with bouts of deep melancholy when he recalls the one woman he loved.
If he needs a kicker, Marie's sister has just found Benigno; Benigno heard wrong and his brother married a different Marie! Seresca has been wracked again by civil war and the true Marie has gone missing in her search for Benigno.
Observation One: You can get a clue towards a player's play preference through reading their backstories. We had four players, myself, Sally, Justin and Greg. The problem was that, without a general guidance towards a style of backstory, we each responded differently.
Sally's backstory read like a compromise between game utility (a justified broad skillset, including medicine and fighting) and awesome genre stuff: Sarina's mother died shortly after childbirth in a nunnery; Sarina later reading her mother's diary to learn that her mother was abandoned, pregnant, by her father (the stepson of a wealthy merchant).
Justin's background seemed inspired by Dangerous Liaisons. Maurice, a noble socialite who, upon being caught mid-coitus by an angry father and his entourage, was able to not only save face but increase his reputation! Years later (the in-game present), the lover is now a powerful Duchess who uses Maurice (who, understandably, has both many enemies and allies throughout the nobility) to engage in politics, keeping her own hands clean.
Greg's character, Rudolfo, is a simple serf turned to thievery very early in life. He began to make a habit of riding beneath coaches to steal their goods. This went all well and good until he rode a coach into the big city (the country bumpkin's first glimpse of a city) and was caught by the head of the city's crime lord. That would have been a bang, but was later turned into a backstory event.
We did a quick map of the relationships, to help tie our characters together. To my dismay, we didn't tie the characters very intimately, as far as the players were concerned. Perhaps there was more behind Jay's GM screen, but we didn't see much of it. My preference is to lay everything on the table, so that we can properly make decisions to heighten tension and fiddle with the relationships.
So then we get together, face to face.
First things first, we sit down to make characters. A few qualitative items, like Personality, Means (A game where you don't count coins! Yay!), etc. Then the qualitative items, stats, called here Qualities. This is where I first had some trouble. A Gallant character has twelve qualities, which means that I have to declare 5 of them great qualities, 4 of them less so, and 3 of them even less. My brain always freezes at statistics, harkening back to old Rolemaster scarring or something.
Observation Two: Too many choices can be crippling to a person. My suggestion (based on personal experience, and user interface & consumer choice readings, so unscientific, for sure) is always to divide things up into reasonable chunks. If I am given a list of 12 qualities, my brain freezes. If they are divided up in some memorable way, say 3 groups of 4 qualities, then making allocation decisions is much easier.
Then we get to Je Ne Sais Qois, which is your level of heroic-ness. This means that average Joe Guard gets a Qois of one, while the starting PC gets a Qois of four. It comes into play later.
Lastly, we decide on Traits. These are positive, negative or situation dependent attributes which give a bonus or penalty during play. I can't say how these work, because we didn't much use them in the game.
Observation Three: With twelve Qualities, and the qualitative stats (Personality, Means, Apperance, Social Status, etc), why do we need Traits? There wasn't any drive to use them during play, so perhaps the reward for using them should be increased? That or do away with them altogether.
One more quick note on mechanics. We have these stones, I called them "thingies" or "stones", but I'm sure they had a better name. For now, I'll call them stones. Their purpose was that if you give a stone to the GM, you get to do some scene/reality modification or some kind of system bonus. Players can give stones to other players, and the GM can give them to players, for anything they deem appropriately "cool."
So the game starts. Our characters have not met, and are to be tied together via their relationships.
It is night and Sarina is riding into the city on horseback (or is she in the city?). She sees a struggling woman being forcibly shoved into a carriage, and it then storms off away from the city. I play a stone, "It's pouring rain! Fsshhhshhshshh" Sarina scoops up a handkerchief bearing some initials on it. I play another stone, "It's bloodstained!"
Observation Four: The purpose of the stones is too vague to encourage frequent use. I played the rain to create more tension and atmosphere, but it went largely ignored and had no impact on play. The bloodstain, well, we haven't found the victim yet, so I don't know what it's effects will be.
It is now the next day. We then cut to Maurice, who has received a letter from the Duchess. The Duchess intercepted a messenger's note and needs Maurice to find the the location of a Marie Belmont. He is to begin searching at the estate of Karad Mirnan. Maurice then sends for Rudolfo, who performs tasks more suited to a commoner.
Benigno is busy drinking himself to death, deep in depression. As a royal guardsman with a dead king and missing prince, he has no occupation to keep him busy. His bang happens immediately -- Marie's sister appears and tells him of his mistake. Benigno immediately begins thanking the sisters and pulls her forcibly from the pub, only to bump into Marie! Thank the heavens! After much sobbing and crushing embraces, it turns out it's not Marie, just a near look-alike! Benigno then pulls the two women back into the pub.
Back to the night before, Sarina has now reached the gate of a grand estate. She coerces her way past the guardhouse, convincing the guards she was summoned in haste.
The next day, Maurice is now trying to convince Rudolfo to come along as his manservant. The two have a prior relationship of this, so after Maurice delivers a brilliant and persuasive argument, half of the words fly right through Rudolfo's poor head, we get a non-comittal, "Sure." Hah! I think I gave some stones here.
Benigno then talks to the two women in the pub and learns that the Marie doppelganger was almost kidnapped! And the woman that was kidnapped was named Marie! Whether it is his Marie or not, Benigno is stricken with hope and a sense of purpose. He rides off to the inn where the doppelganger escaped and Marie was taken.
Sarina browbeats her way into staying the night. Unfortunately, she is unable to see the Viscount Mirnan until the morning. The next day, the steward leads her to the basement, and almost leads her into a cell! Somehow, Sarina talks her way into receiving a proper treatment and is sent to the drawing room. It isn't until the doors are closed and locked that she realizes she is trapped.
Maurice and Rudolfo reach the inn mentioned in the Duchess' letter. Maurice uses his persuasive ways to learn that a Marie was led hastily from this very place. Benigno then assaults the same inn, going to the serving staff with manic questioning. They are unhelpful and, with the hopes of finding Marie raised and dashed so quickly, he begins to lose himself in drink.
Observation Five: The scene switching was brilliant, and I was riveted to nearly everything that happened. Unfortunately, Sarina was blocked at every turn, and was forced to do a lot of browbeating and waiting. I'm not sure how this could have been aided, however. Perhaps one of the participants could chime in?
(observation, cont.) Regarding the PC interaction, it was wonderful. Maurice and Rudolfo first meet Benigno in the stables. Rudolfo surreptitiously grabs Benigno's coin purse! Since in this game you have Means as a qualitative stat, we could create a comic moment without player in-fighting: Maurice shouts, "Thank you stableboy! Here is a coin for your trouble ... er ... my purse! No matter, finding my Marie trumps any material concerns! Here, take this ring!" (it also established the increasing gaudiness of the royal guard, since they apparently can afford or receive jewelry. Or maybe it's just Benigno).
So with Benigno in despair and getting very drunk, Maurice sends a servant over to point him to Maurice. The trio of PCs then agree that the Viscount's estate is where to go! Maurice tells Benigno to wait here while he and his servant investigate. Benigno agrees, but still grabs his horse and rides after them. The three gallantly ride off! Well, two ride gallantly, with a third in the rear and swaying with enthusiasm (and some inebriation).
Sarina realizes that she has seen no women in this entire mansion. She demands to receive the help of a lady servant. The GM ponders this, making it obvious to us that there are no women servants in the entire place! I shout, "They grab a stablehand and dress him up! And she needs to talk <queue terrible girlish voice> like this!"
Jay seizes on that and suddenly I'm playing the cross-dressing NPC with the orders to NOT let this Sarina leave the drawing room. Much hilarity ensues with laughable feminity, Sarina talking her way back to her bedroom, the stablehand dreading helping Sarina with whatever things women do behind closed doors, and eventually Sarina screaming and pushing the stablehand out the window!
As Maurice, Rudolfo and Benigno ride up to the gatehouse, they strangely hear a shouting and a splashing off to the side of mansion. That's odd. Our group is stymied by the guard, so I play a stone: "The guard used to be in the Royal Guard! He's a friend of mine!" And Benigno mentions the need for royal guards, and why you have the experience already, and just give them my name!
Sarina is stuck in her room. She pulls a pistol from her belongings and fires it into the lock! And screams bloody murder!
So the three are led past the gate. Their horses are taken by a stablehand, and Rudolfo goes with them. The door to the mansion is opened and a powdered servant receives them. Then! A gunshot is heard and a woman's screams.
Maurice is now standing at the door facing a cloud of powder. The servant is on the ground, and powdered boot-tracks lead into the mansion, following the shouts of, "Marie! My love! I come to rescue you!" Benigno clambers up the stairs, a half-dozen guardsmen behind him, to nearly run into Sarina. "You are not Marie!" "No, but I can help you find her! Now look behind you!" And the guards advance!
Rudolfo scuffles with the stablehand, almost taking him by surprise. The two duke it out for a bit.
Maurice runs to the top of the stairs, but doesn't approach the melee. He doesn't want to steal Benigno's glory. Besides, he wants to size up this raving madman.
Benigno spins to face the guards. Sarina raises her pistol, and the guards draw back with fear. Ha! thinks Benigno, the cowards! Then the guards see the smoke trailing from the pistol and through her bluff. Benigno, by virtue of genre convention, gathers three advancing swords with his own, Sarina throws her pistol into the battle and pulls out a knife. With a guard down, she grabs his sword. Maurice offers a helping foot by knocking over a column and rolling it into the guards. Two topple, Benigno cuts the pants off a third (in front of a lady! The guard is too ashamed to fight on), and pushes the column back into the recovering guards!
Meanwhile, Rudolfo has bested the stablehand and demands an explanation for the kidnapping. The poor kid only knows that there is something fishy going on in the basement! Rudolfo then makes his way into the mansion.
The guards taken care of and wrapped up in rugs and tapestries, Sarina leads the two noblemen down to the foot of the stair. There they meet Rudolfo who already knows where Sarina is taking them. Off, to the cellar!
Observation Six: The system fully supports grand and crazy play. We started out with everyone stating intent, and the resolution around the table (no initiative, just start on the GM's left and continue around). This go a little confusing, so we just did immediate intent/resolution in turn. There has to be a happy medium, since the method we used meant that if we wanted to coordinate attacks, we'd have to interrupt the current turn to dicuss. Which we did, now that I think of it.
Okay, system discussion in a following post.
On 3/27/2004 at 8:26pm, coxcomb wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
A few quick comments:
1.) This session was invaluable in helping me align my goals for the game, which have altered since I started the design.
2.) The "stones" are the temporary vesion of Je Ne Sais Quoi. For this session, I was very wishy-washy about how they worked. Essentially they are currency with which players can "buy" narrative rights and enter powerful author stance (less powerful author stance is free).
3.) Many of the problems with play during the session were problems of my ingrained GMing style taking precedence over the goals of the game. Because I chose to railroad everyone into the adventure instead of enforcing PC-to-PC relationships at the outset (which is what my rules say) I ended up with some awkwardness. This included all of the blocking that took place with Serina: I had expectations that her character would not try to follow the captive alone. Suffice it to say, that the experience served as a wake-up call to me about how to play the game.
4.) The end result is that I am working hard to fix the incoherancy that the group was subjected to. Our next adventure will tell whether I drew the right conclusions or not.
On 3/27/2004 at 8:56pm, Zak Arntson wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Okay, here are some system comments ...
Quoi Stones - In my notes here, it says that the stones are called Quoi. But our Je Nes Sais Quoi score is also called Quoi? Maybe two different terms are needed? During play, I kept calling the stones by different names (mostly "thingie").
The utility of quoi stones needs to be set down in the system, with very strict mechanical guidelines. Otherwise everyone in the group has a different idea about how they work. I like the addition of non-obvious facts into the game. For example, I was able to announce that the Viscount was known for both having an excellent wine cellar and the miserliness not to share it. This added character to the Viscount, who we never did meet, and set up a potential area for action to look forward to.
Conflict Mechanic - In Gallant, the mechanic goes like this: You announce an action, the GM picks two of your qualities that best fit the action, and you roll for successes. The opposed person (usually the GM) rolls his own successes, and these are compared. Quoi comes into play a great deal, meaning that heroes will always beat minions with the same number of successes, since they have more quoi (not stones, but the actual Je Nes Sais Quoi stat).
We tended to roleplay the social situations without rolling the dice, which stymied some of the play. Jay, you've got a great system for conflict, which would benefit if applied to both social and combat situations. I remember you saying this was your own fault as GM, since the system does allow for this. Perhaps there is a way to encourage the conflict rolls? On a character sheet? Or a GM sheet? Or something?
Damage - The character sheet has an evocative section for damage. Damage is split up into the scope of the effect: Exchange, Engagement, Scene, Act, Story. I would love to see this pushed into the foreground of play, with damage being both social and physical (and perhaps abstracted so that damage is damage is damage, no matter how you take it).
Player Backstory - As you can see from our different backstories, we had different priorities for play. Benigno's backstory was the shortest written, with a brief mention on occupation, and an emphasis on melodramatic relationships. I was looking forward to all of our different relationships to be tied together, everyone has some crazy genre start scene, and zoom! We're off. Instead my kicker was brought into the game, Sarina's backstory was ignored (though she was easily drawn into the plot), Maurice was instructed by a mentor to investigate something, and Rudolfo followed Maurice along, as a manservant. Instead of everyone dealing with brotherhood, lost love, and the like, the backstories were mostly used as a springboard and not as a continual backdrop to the game.
My suggestion: Clarify what a backstory consists of, rather than leaving it so broad. This could be a "dial" that the group decides on, so that everyone agrees as to what the play priorities will be. I set my own dial to, "backstory is a paragraph with brief mention to occupation and a tangling of relationships." For Sarina's and Rudolfo's background, the dial looked to be, "backstory is a history, incorporating your characters skills and social situation." I can't remember Maurice's background very well, so I'll let the player pipe up on that one.
Statted NPCs - Do NPCs need PC-style stats? The guards were faceless enough, you could have easily given them a simple number that we would be rolling against. This probably wouldn't apply to all NPCs, but for simple mooks, a mook rule would speed things up.
Character Generation & Freebie Points - At the end of character creation, you get a certain amount of points to spread among the Qualities, Traits and Je Nes Sais Quoi. With Quois being a measure of "heroic-ness", I felt it strange that a player can immediately make their character more heroic than another's. For Benigno, I opted to up a few Qualities to obscene amounts, but I'm still not comfortable enough with the system: Would it be more beneficial to bump up Quois? Or Qualities?
Since the game does contain this point balancing mechanism, it's something you have to answer.
Other Thoughts - I do have a play preference with Gallant, and in that vein, I want to see the relationship map tied closer into the rules and play. It was great to have a map drawn out in front of us, and I even put the Viscount's name in there, since I figured he'd be roped into it. Unfortunately, the players had few links between their relationships, so it was difficult to improvise the fantastic coincidences and emotional stresses that you see in the genre.
Okay, I'm done! In closing, I had an amazing time. I love this game! In fact, I would be very willing to continue playtesting and help work this thing towards a finished product. That, and I get to spread my larger-than-life (some say cartoony) roleplaying style even further.
On 3/27/2004 at 9:04pm, Zak Arntson wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Okay, discussing Jay's comments, now.
coxcomb wrote: A few quick comments:
2.) The "stones" are the temporary vesion of Je Ne Sais Quoi. For this session, I was very wishy-washy about how they worked. Essentially they are currency with which players can "buy" narrative rights and enter powerful author stance (less powerful author stance is free).
Be prepared to have some strict guidelines for this one. In fact, a play group discussion before the game starts, setting the "dial" for what consitutes powerful and non-powerful author stance, would be ideal. Also that author stance doesn't by itself produce Narrativist play (big N, there). Consider that, and how/if you want to promote Narrativism with how stones can be used.
coxcomb wrote: 3.) Many of the problems with play during the session were problems of my ingrained GMing style taking precedence over the goals of the game.
...
Serina: I had expectations that her character would not try to follow the captive alone. Suffice it to say, that the experience served as a wake-up call to me about how to play the game.
Hey, no worries! It's good to learn more about your own play styles. Like I said in my second post above, perhaps there's a way to encourage the GM playing to the goals of the game? And as for players not following the GM's plans, with this kind of game, you've got to expect it! Lesson learned, though, it looks like.
As for your Number 4: I can't wait to play again! I want to find out what this nefarious Viscount is up to.
On 3/27/2004 at 9:19pm, clehrich wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Just a brief note, having skimmed; I'll read carefully soon.
If the confusion about Quoi stones and Je ne sais quoi is, as it seems to be, terminological, may I suggest that the stones be called panaches? Literally, a panache [pron. pah-NAHSH] is a feather, puff, or plume, especially in one's hat, but of course it comes to mean a certain, well, je ne sais quoi that musketeers and Cyrano de Bergerac and so forth have. If you wanted to be cute, you could have little chips with bushy feathers on them. Elan would be another possibility, but it's not a tangible thing so you can't have multiple of them.
Chris Lehrich
On 3/27/2004 at 9:22pm, coxcomb wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
I am getting out of the realm of actual play and into Indie Game design, but to clarify:
The current goals of the system look something like this:
* Facilitate the use of genre conventions in play (i.e. be true to cinematic swashbuckling and period drama)
* Empower players to contribute to color and situation, particularly as concerns their characters, but in general as well.
* Provide fertile ground for vanilla Narrativism as a play goal if the players want it. Narrativism isn't an explicit requirement of play, but players that want it can find the means of addressing premise in the rules as they are shaping up.
Depending on my free-time availability, I will post some of the rules in the Indie Design forum soon, where all and sundry can hammer at them.
On 3/27/2004 at 9:26pm, coxcomb wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
clehrich wrote:
If the confusion about Quoi stones and Je ne sais quoi is, as it seems to be, terminological, may I suggest that the stones be called panaches? Literally, a panache [pron. pah-NAHSH] is a feather, puff, or plume, especially in one's hat, but of course it comes to mean a certain, well, je ne sais quoi that musketeers and Cyrano de Bergerac and so forth have. If you wanted to be cute, you could have little chips with bushy feathers on them. Elan would be another possibility, but it's not a tangible thing so you can't have multiple of them.
Quoi the stat (Quoi is used as a iniversal abbreviatio for Je Ne Sais Quoi, which is a mouthful to be bandying about furing play) is directly related to the temporary Quoi rating. It is something like Willpower in Storyteller systems in that you have a permanent rating, but the currency version fluctuates.
I think that the confusion can be cleared up in the written rules. I must not have explained very well in the session.
On 3/27/2004 at 10:40pm, Mark D. Eddy wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Hmm... I'm confused. The way I pronounce (and have heard French speakers pronounce) "Je ne sais quoi" only has two and a half syllables (using consonant and glottal stop as a half syllable). Zhun s'qua is the closest I can get to writing it. To me, "Quoi" is usually a question, the French equivalent of "Huh?" I guess my question is why you needed to shorten it.
On 3/27/2004 at 11:06pm, Andrew Norris wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Interesting read, thank you for making an in-depth analysis.
I'm interested in reading more about how the Quoi stones work; I accidentally stumbled on an identical mechanic I'm using in my D20Modern game (glass beads exchanged for temporary author/director stance), and I've been flying blind without examples. I'm at least reassured you seemed as confused by it as we did :)
On 3/27/2004 at 11:09pm, coxcomb wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Mark D. Eddy wrote: Hmm... I'm confused. The way I pronounce (and have heard French speakers pronounce) "Je ne sais quoi" only has two and a half syllables (using consonant and glottal stop as a half syllable). Zhun s'qua is the closest I can get to writing it. To me, "Quoi" is usually a question, the French equivalent of "Huh?" I guess my question is why you needed to shorten it.
Maybe I don't. My initial reasoning was that teaching players how to pronounce French is not a goal of the game. ;-)
On 3/28/2004 at 1:26am, clehrich wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Hey Jay and Zak,
Where are we going with this thread? I'm not trying to moderate; I just don't want to jump in on something if it's totally off-topic, and I'm losing track of the topic. We started with a play description, which rocked, and then I think I started a hijack by making remarks about terminology, and now we're turning into a nice constructive critique of the system -- which would presumably be a different thread. Or would it? So where are we going?
Chris Lehrich
P.S. As long as there is a conversation going on, I'll toss in my remark backhanded. I'm with Mark: the term "Quoi" just feels all wrong to me, because it's like having "Who" stones that define how Who-ey you are, or your level of Who-ness, which means basically how tough and alert you are -- all because of the expression, "Who goes there?" I suppose I also wince at the possibility of meeting someone who's very into this game and has lots of things to say, but makes the name of the stones rhyme with "toy."
On 3/28/2004 at 8:20am, coxcomb wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Chris Lehrich wrote: Where are we going with this thread?
I'm not usre how much more is to be gleaned from this thread. I'm in the unenviable position of not having all of my notes and thoughts together in readable form. When I get it together, I'll start a thread in Indie Design and we can get some actual system critique going.
If anyone has comments about Zak's summary of play, which is where this started, that discussion belongs on this thread.
On 3/29/2004 at 6:52am, Scourge108 wrote:
RE: [Gallant] Well swackle my bush (playtest)
Hey, just got back from the weekend, and was glad to see we had a thread about this game. First thing I wanted to clarify is that I (Greg) was playing Maurice, not Rudolpho, who was played by Justin. Not that it matters from game design. Plus I wanted to know when the next game will be!
My impression of the Quoi stones (or "thingies"), at least in the way I ended up using them, was that they fit the premise of Gallant. Zak used them to add narrative elements like the storm and the bloody handkerchief, which really added a lot of drama and humor to the game. The rest of us were trying to keep up, but seemed to use Quoi mainly for more tactical advantages or to overcome failed rolls. For example, I used some of mine with the marble column. Feeling it undignified for me to interfere in another man's battles, but still wanting to even the odds, I tipped over a nearby marble column and rolled it at the crowd of thugs. Maurice was designed to be much more charming than strong, and since Vigor was the trait determined to be relevant to this action, I failed the initial roll. It just seemed wrong that the style of character we were going for in this game should fail at something like that, because they have a certain, well, je ne sais quoi. They should succeed against the odds when it fits the theme, so I spent some Quoi and rolled a few more dice. My divine favor shone through, and the column knocked 2 guards down (once again on the backswing from Benigno), and we saved the day, just about.
Traits never seemed to come up. It seemed they covered things like skills, giving a bonus to a Quality roll when applicable. They could also be hindrances, like negative personality traits or weaknesses. For some reason, an applicable situation never came up. For example, Maurice's Traits were Seductive +2, Impulsive -1, Nefarious/Bad Reputation -1, and Fencing/Duels +1. Maurice did flirt with some barmaids, but never seduced anyone. I'm not sure what would be an applicable situation for Impulsive, but it was never mentioned. We never met the Viscount, so his reputation hasn't preceded him yet. And my only swordplay was to point my rapier at the back of a cad's neck who attacked a lady. He surrendered, and no roll was needed. Part of this may have been just the nature of the first game, which seemed to focus mainly on getting the group together. Maybe it's because we all did a lot of improvising, doing things that didn't necessarily relate to our traits. Hard to say just yet.