Hi Paul,

Up in [My Life with Master] Black ooze oozes forth, Lisa Padol asked this question, including a quote from a previous post:

"2. Could some mechanism prevent the currently numerically-possible outcome that Endgame rolls do not result in the death of the Master?..."

Yes, I've been wondering this myself. What happens if the Master keeps winning to the point where the minions just ain't gonna win any rolls?

Maybe now's a good time to see what can be dreamed up that would work better.

That's cool. My own thinking is that a minion is advised to be cautious about resisting the Master's commands if their Love is barely greater than Fear plus Weariness, and if they aren't, that the other minions should maybe prevent them from doing so. It's in no one's best interests if a minion with a small die pool (relative to what the Master will be rolling) triggers a protracted endgame. But I'm curious how folks think the game might respond if the situation does occur.

Just to be clear though, it is never a impossible numerically for the minion to defeat the Master. The minion will always be rolling at least one die. And the Master could presumably roll all fours.

Paul

Well, how about if the Master wins by a large enough margin he simply kills the upstart minion (or breaks them in some fashion), end game is over, the fear level increases by 1, and normal play resumes until someone better equipped to try manages to pull it off.

I would think this would also encourage a longer term play as players would be hesitant to enter endgame too early

Okay, so endgame isn't somethng that is automatically triggered, but something that becomes possible when the stars, er, numbers are right.

Yeah, I know it's numerically possible for a minion rolling one die to defeat the Master, but playing out round after round waiting for that to happen sounds like the bad kind of torture.

-Lisa

I like Ralph's solution, the ultimate gamble. And, yes, it means that you're out of the game.

OTOH, I also like the "Game Wins" option. How about leave it to a vote of the other players, ties broken by the GM?

BTW, Paul, while it is never statistically impossible, the odds can, in certain circumstances, the rarity of which I'll not speculate on, fall below 1% (including maximum bonus dice). Which means a metric buttload of rolling to get to the master's demise.

Mike

I don't like the idea of killing one PC and starting, even though it is quite a neat way of proceeding. That's because I don't want one person sitting out on their on whilst the others carry on the game.

In this respect I think that you should do something else.

For example, if the odds become insurmountable, the Others turn up and resolve the situation. The Master has clearly become a monster so they kill him. In this case they drag off all the minions that are still alive for their on foul purposes.

On the other hand if Love is high enough, the villagers kill the Master and liberate those minions that don't die.

Valamir wrote: Well, how about if the Master wins by a large enough margin he simply kills the upstart minion (or breaks them in some fashion), end game is over, the fear level increases by 1, and normal play resumes until someone better equipped to try manages to pull it off.

Actually, I think that was proposed, just kicking the Minion out and raising Fear by one. Simple, and works, I think. Could make for long games in some cases.

Mike

Mm, I think for Endgame purposes, killing a Minion is not necessarily a Bad Thing. Think of the B-Movies where the Master does kill one of his own -- it means Things Get Serious.

But I agree that having a player forced to sit out from there on is undesireable. Either you make a new Minion or perhaps play an NPC -- someone's Love?

The Master kicking the Minion out is an interesting alternative. Mechanically, how does this affect the Minion's numbers? What can a kicked out Minion -- and her player -- do?

I do like the idea of the Fear level rising as a result.

-Lisa

Well...the minion death thing ain't happening. I didn't design a game that precludes PC death only to introduce it back in. "Sucks to be you. Make up a new dude, dude. Or sit and watch."

Ron is right, the issue of never-ending Endgame does get raised a lot. But you know what? It has consistently been just people worrying about it. No one has ever reported an actual occurrence. And should it arise, my strong belief is that the endeavor of collaborative Master creation, group character creation, and the shared effort of play within the structure of the rules, being witness to failed Overtures and whatnot, actually results in game participants being eminently qualified to houserule their way out of a never-ending Endgame.

Once Endgame is initiated, the Master's death is a given. So in the event of a so-called never-ending Endgame, all we're really talking about is how long the group continues to play before deciding the minion characters have achieved Epilogue-conclusive scores. I believe groups are going to figure it out.

Likely after a few rounds of Endgame they'll look at the stats of the minions, realize they're all destined to die, and negotiate an Othello-esque ending to their game that's supremely satisfying to everyone. Or perhaps one of the characteristics of their Master is his capacity for mistaking his minions for each other...and so when the minion contesting with the Master grows Weary, they decide another minion (whose Love is also greater than Fear plus Weariness) will switch in for him.

Really, a group collectively realizing that Endgame is become protracted and threatens the integrity of the story is functional intrusion of social contract. Instead of fearing it, shouldn't we be thrilling to it? Isn't that what narrativism is all about...creating a mechanical basis for a story-focused play gestalt that handles risen concerns with uncommon power?

Why should I doubt that a group won't be able to resolve the situation in a way that satisfies them?

Paul

Welllll .... maybe. Speaking of functional play, I agree with you. In the last two games I've played, in both cases, when the rebelling Minion failed an attempt or two, the other players framed themselves right into the kill-Master scene to help. And both games were indeed characterized by honest, overt, verbalized hatred for the Master among all the players.

More generally, though, I tend to dislike hopping to "naked Social Contract" myself, especially for climactic resolution. I'm better with it in terms of not-especially Premise-relevant logistics or scene-changes. I don't think the issue is one of Narrativism at all - it's neither more nor less Narrativist to rely on Social Contract for resolution/outcomes than anything else.

I may have to make another one of those marginal notes, more or less exactly what you posted, into my book, so I can feel like we're "following the rules" in doing it.

Best,
Ron

Hey Ron,

More generally, though, I tend to dislike hopping to "naked Social Contract" myself, especially for climactic resolution.

Yeah...actually, I kind of feel the same way. But I'm trying to resist that feeling. I have this notion it's a gamer thing, and that normal people, well-prepared by the play experience, will output a communally satisfying result when they arrive at the natural ending of the minion stories, like gestalt, pretty much without hardly realizing they were forced to fill in the gaps. Subsequent mental reflection for them will be "that was awesome," not "that really fell apart at the end." But maybe I'm wrong.

I may have to make another one of those marginal notes, more or less exactly what you posted, into my book, so I can feel like we're "following the rules" in doing it.

Did I tell you I've been vaguely putting together a small list of "official" rules annotations, suggestions for what folks might scrawl in their best deranged handwriting at various points in the margins of the book? So far I have three, but I'm mulling this one as an addition.

Paul