Hi!

After playing Polaris for the first time (and aching for more -- unfortunately, it was a trial at a convention and not a regular group) I noticed that we never used the key phrase IT WAS NOT MEANT TO BE in the four hours of actual play (we spend 2,5h for CharGen, which already was utterly fun).

And I wonder why.

Everybody had a sheet with the key phrases. But when it came to conflict, we either used BUT ONLY IF and AND FURTHERMORE to compensate the opponents actions or IT SHALL NOT COME TO PASS to negate them.

After re-reading the explanation of IT WAS NOT MEANT TO BE it seems to me that this is a cheap way out of a conflict. Was it that we felt it is too easy (like cheating)? Or was it that we didn't want to erase the opponents ideas without consequences?  Apparently, we didn't feel a need for the phrase. Maybe we just didn't step into situations where it is suitable.

Of course, nobody can answer my question (I'll try to ask the other players when I meet them again).

However, does somebody have similar experiences? In what kind of situations do you use this phrase?

Daniela

I can offer what has happened at our table with key phrases and our expierences with them:

After 4 sessions (what amounts to about 8-10 hours of actual play) involving about 6 or scenes per player (so that means a total of about 18 scenes), we have not used it was not meant to be either.

It wasn't because it was cheating or anything, generally it was because I didn't see any situtations where I personally would want to have that. That could be because of (A) it means I have to negate one of my own statements, which generally I don't like to do (B) that it didn't seem worth ending the conflict. Generally when I end a conflict it comes down to a dice roll, or a and furthermore for umph.

I find at the table, that I generally start conflicts all guns blazing with and furthermores, this makes conflicts short and intense from what I have seen at the table, and it also tends to burn through themes quickly, but on the upside you really get a good idea of what is critical to the players at the table.

I think the major time I would use it was not meant to be would be the climax parts of the game "but only if I die" and "but only if the world ends". I wouldn't leave these upto the dice to decide for me, so I would be willing to pony up the but it was not meant to be.

I guess in a round about way what I am saying, I would use the "it was not meant to be" when I didn't have options for revising (because all themes are used), I didn't trust the dice, and it was really important to me as player for the narrative outcome. However, through most of our game these "statements" where it is really important to me are usually given by a "and furthermore" therefore negating the possiability of it was not meant to be.

As a side note, I listened to ALL of Paul Tevis recorded Polaris session, I don't recall that they used it was not meant to be during the session at all (but maybe they used it once, but it wasn't used a lot). But also during that session they didn't use it shall not come to pass that much either. While in our group one player uses that one a lot (but also has the highest weariness value).

I don't think that answers your question fully, but it is another data point.

I've played the game a couple of times and I can recall "It Was Not Meant To Be" being used in both, but not very often. Generally I think players seek to engage with what their opposite number throws at them but occasionally it can be unpalatable. I see this phrase as a safety valve, to avoid anything either getting out of hand or going down avenues that some players wouldn't wish to explore.

What GB said. The first conflict phrase I ever used was this one. The other player asked for something that was so subtly and totally wrong for my character that I wanted to make the strong statement of giving up my own goal in the conflict. This was sort of funny since a full block was the last thing I had thought I'd be using at that stage.

In most groups, I think that it was not meant to be is the least common phrase (use of phrases tends to be quite different from group to group, but I've never heard of anyone using it frequently.)  There are lots of reasons why it's unpopular: It's not a powerful phrase.  In fact it's a loss.  Further, it subtracts from the fiction rather than adding to it.

However, its existence, even unused, is really important.  It makes the uncertainty of but only if actually uncertain, and it means that but only if phrases are naturally less reaching and widespread than the and furthermore phrases.

I've used it, I know, but I can't recall when.  Largely when the request was totally at odds with what I wanted with one of the characters I controlled in the scene.

yrs--
--Ben