I'm unclear when the GM gets to assess for new cards during a conflict. I've read the description several times and I can't get it. I think part of it is connected to having a hard time understanding what constitutes a page in a conflict.

Thank you for reading this.

Hello,

I have just encountered the exact same problem while preparing for WGP play. I filled several notebook pages with questions and went over the example of conflict several times ... and I think I finally understand. I hope Michael will correct me if any of the following is wrong.

1. A "page" refers primarily to a given player. So if I'm the GM, and you and Bob and Jessica are the three players, and if everyone is involved in a given conflict, then we have three pages of conflict to deal with, one for each of you.

2. For each page/player, we proceed in "panels," which are defined specifically as one of the following options concerning card play:

i) GM leads, player responds, GM responds (three steps)

ii) player leads, GM responds (two steps)

The two types of panels proceed alternately. The type that starts the conflict depends on who picked the fight.

3. With more than one player involved in the conflict, the group plays the first panel for each page/player, then the second panel for each page/player, and so on. This makes the Page of Conflict sheet (page 131 in my copy) very important and useful, especially because some of the cards played stay on the sheet and some are discarded as you go along.

The ranking card concept is also important but can only be understood once the above information makes sense.

4. Finally, the GM Assesses before each panel in terms of first, second, third, and so on. The rules are a bit different depending on how many player-characters are involved.

i) If there's only one player-character in the conflict, then it would look like this (let's assume I am GM and that I picked the fight):

We begin by readying our Aspects, increasing their Suffering.

Panel 1: I lead with a card, you respond with a card, I respond with a card.

You may now Assess and I may now Assess. To be as clear as possible, Assessment can either increase or decrease Suffering, which is different from Readying, which only increases it.

Panel 2. you lead with a card, I respond with a card.

You may now Assess and I may now Assess.

Panel 3 looks like Panel 1, then Panel 4 looks like Panel 2, then Panel 5 looks like Panels 1 and 3, then Panel 6 looks like Panels 2 and 4, and on we go.

ii) If there are two or more player-characters in the conflict, then it would look like this (again let's assume I am GM and that I picked the fight with every character; the other players in addition to you are Bob and Jessica):

We begin by readying our Aspects, increasing their Suffering.

Panel 1 for you: I lead with a card, you respond with a card, I respond with a card.

Panel 1 for Bob: I lead with a card, Bob responds with a card, I respond with a card.

Panel 1 for Jessica: I lead with a card, Jessica responds with a card, I respond with a card.

You may now Assess and I may now Assess. To be as clear as possible, Assessment can either increase or decrease Suffering, which is different from Readying, which only increases it.

Panel 2 for you: I lead with a card, you respond with a card, I respond with a card.

Bob may now Assess but I cannot.

Panel 2 for Bob: I lead with a card, Bob responds with a card, I respond with a card.

Jessica can now Assess but I cannot.

Panel 2 for Jessica: I lead with a card, Jessica responds with a card, I respond with a card.

You may now Assess and I may now Assess.

Panel 3 looks like Panel 1, then Panel 4 looks like Panel 2, then Panel 5 looks like Panels 1 and 3, then Panel 6 looks like Panels 2 and 4, and on we go.

The difference with multiple player-characters is that I as GM may only Assess when the Panel number shifts for everyone, not per Page/player.

Let me know if that helps!

Best, Ron

Hmmm, I play it a little bit differently than Ron, and I think my method has better textual support in the rules. 

When I play, the order is like this...

PAGE 1, PANEL 1 (i.e., First round for Player 1)
(If GM picked the fight with this player, he plays a card here)
Player 1 plays a card
GM responds

PAGES 2+, PANEL 1 (i.e., First round for Players 2 and after)
(If the GM picked the fight with this player, he plays a card now)
Player 2 (or whoever) plays a card
GM responds

PAGE 1, PANELS 2+ (i.e., 2nd round and later for Player 1)
Player 1 assesses his cards
Player 1 plays a card
GM assesses his cars
GM responds

PAGES 2+, PANELS 2+ (i.e., 2nd round and later for Players 2 and after)
Player 2 assesses his cards
Player 2 plays a card
GM responds

Where Ron and I mainly differ is that, in my version, the GM only goes first in a panel when it's Panel 1 and the GM picked the fight with that player.  Then and only then, are there three cards played in a panel.  For Panels 2 and after, the panel begins with the player laying down a card and ends with the GM's response.

In any case, assessment occurs at the beginning of Panels 2+.  The player assesses at the start of Panel 2 when things cycle around to her Page.  The GM, however, is active on every page because she must oppose every player.  For that reason, the GM only assesses when it cycles around to Page One.