So, I was over seeing Joe Prince on Monday night and after we played some Dragon vs The Gun (another Ronnies entry from 2005) we talked a little about Realization Dawning. I waffled about missing bits and unanswered questions from the 24-hr version. (I only got to read it all the way through on Monday after printing it out.) I also pushed Motes around on a table while Joe wondered what it was all about. He did give me his copy of Neil Gaiman's Eternals to read too.

Here's what came up and my answers to them now I've had a few days.

-----

Do I need a closed economy? (i.e. are the Motes capped at the outset in a central pool, or are there as many Motes as play needs?)
Pros: Closed economy sets a limit on the resources that can be brought in, triggering the end game.
Cons: perhaps not as “natural” a way to play, some games will happen with fewer or more resources as they were less/more mechanically invested in by the players.

What are the rules for the Early Morning?
The GM can use successes to remove resources from Characters (and related Desires that were used in the conflict) or to boost their own Leitmotifs, People and Places. (Capped by the PC’s Mood rating, see below.)
The Players can only reinvest their successes on related Desires, to boost their Character or purchase floating People and Places (just a single mote to capture them?).
When the Leitmotifs expire the game ends.

Re-rolls, you mentioned this but didn’t put in rules for it.
Discard a single mote to re-roll (after seeing all the dice on the table) and say how that element (Desire, Character, Leitmotif, People, Place changed circumstance). All in the roll can do this. (Just once?)

Who speaks when in the Epilogue?
The player narrates for their PC with restrictions dictated by the rules: 0, 1 or 2, 3 or more Motes.
The player narrates with authority for any People and Places they have bought in play.
The player narrates for any Desires they have Motes on (where more than one player has the same Desire, the narration is dominated by the one with most motes, or are Desires exclusive, see below).
The GM narrates any unfulfilled Desires.
The GM narrates any People and Places with motes left on them (the GM can do this to stop the People or Place being bought by a player, and ending the game by exhausting the Leitmotifs first).
The GM wraps up play.

Can you conflict over Desires? Can we have some guidelines for Desires please?
Maybe you can’t? They should just be unique. Or maybe you can and only one Player can own it at the end of the game?  And I need to think about guides or at least provide more “built” examples.

The “Mood meter” didn’t make it into the text, but it’s on the scribbled notes. How’s it work?
The conception is that your Mood can be (high) +3, +2, +1, -1, -2, -3 (low) [NB:  it cannot be 0]. This provides some colour/constraints to your character’s behaviour/outlook (to help immersion) and also caps the amount of successes that can be spent on improving/reducing your motes. It also limits the number of dice that can be taken from a single element for a dice roll.
For example, Ariel has Mood +1, this means that she can only take 1 Mote from an element to contribute to her roll (e.g. 1 from Ariel, 1 from “Desire: Save Linus”, 1 from “Desire: Defeat Lukas” for 3 dice). She can also only spend one of her successes on any one element (so if she gets two or more successes she can’t put two or more on just one thing; she’d have to improve more things).
You current Mood state can be altered by up to its current rating. Whoever wins decides this (GM or Player). For example, Ariel has Mood +1 and loses, so the GM can switch Ariel’s Mood to either +2 or -1. It also caps how much the GM can burn off of each element in the Early Morning. Very High (+3) and Very Low (-3) are big win/loss areas. ±1 are more moderate.

Ties?
Something tied all the way down is unresolved (and all the Motes are gone). Spend to re-roll!

The GM wins a roll, who gets the first bite at the cherry (i.e. can the GM or Players decide to win)?
I’m fuzzy headed on this.
The rules at the moment say…
“If the winner is the GM then the GM can choose to win the conflict. If they do so the Player(s) they beat gain a number of Motes equal to the number of successes. For multiple Players split the successes between them.”
and also(with stating which one has precedence)
“Or if the winner is the GM the Player(s) can choose to win the conflict, with a twist introduced by the GM. The GM then gains a number of Motes equal to the successes and places them on elements related to the twist.”
I'm thinking it’s strictly the GM who gets the first bite at winning. If the players want to win (in return for fuelling the GM’s resources) then they can ask for this and the GM can choose to accept or not (generally the GM should accept the request, plan an interesting twist and boost Resources). But if it’s refused, or the players don’t want to win the conflict, then the GM wins and the Players get the Motes.
Note that this is strictly for the After Midnight phase of play. In the Early Morning if the GM wins then that wears down Character Resources and Desires. Play sharpens in the Early Morning and elements in play get kicked hard by the dice rolls. (Or at least that is what I’m aiming for.)

Hi Gregor,

What's the logic for how one ought to adjust a character's Mood?  Is it supposed to reflect the character's state as already established in the fiction?  Is it supposed to establish a new state, with everyone retconning in a reason for the change?  If it's the former, I see some tension with the mechanical incentives.  Like, y'know, my character ought to feel bad/sad/discombobulated right now, even after winning, but dammit, I want more Motes.

Also, is Mood -3 any very negative emotion, and Mood +3 any very positive emotion, or did you have something more specific or otherwie different in mind?

I do like this idea as a color/constraint/reminder tool if it could be made to do that successfully.

Ps,
-David

I figure each Mood state would have some guidelines on outlook and behaviour, or something. 1s are fairly mild, while the 3s are the extremes of feeling. +3 is very high/euphoria and -3 is very low/broken.

My aim is that you'd cross the up/down sides a few times (and the swings naturally pull towards the 1s), but the greatest swings can only happen when you're really "up" or "down" (pride comes before a fall, elation out of despair). I intend the Mood state to feed into the fiction. So, coming out of a conflict are you more up or down because of it?

And note that there's an incentive when you're at -1 and you win to put yourself further down to -2 (and not up to +1) so that you can win by more the next time.

I guess I like my heroes to be emo Europeans bringing triumph out of their darkest moments.

I think I get it.  So it's kind of a measure of "how big a deal was that to your character?"  For players who'd otherwise fail to note and portray that, I do like mandating that into the fiction!  It protects against the "conflict resolved, moving on..." style of play I often dislike.

I dig the logic of "the more extreme your mood, the more it can swing", but jumping from +3 to -1 or -3 to +1 doesn't say that to me, as +/-1 is as close as you get to equilibrium.

I also wonder about capping downward (or upward) spirals; when you lose at -3, that's a good time to flip the fuck out, but you've already taken the Mood as low as it can go per the chart.  Maybe the mechanical modifiers cap at +/-3, but the color could be represented with a broader range?

If this is a sidetrack from your design priorities here, I apologize.  I'm not sure how this fits into the grand scheme of Realization Dawning, but I do think it's a neat subsystem.

jumping from +3 to -1 or -3 to +1 doesn't say that to me, as +/-1 is as close as you get to equilibrium.

Gregor, is there a new draft available?

Best, Ron