The Forge Forums Read-only Archives
The live Forge Forums
|
Articles
|
Reviews
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
June 24, 2022, 02:10:36 PM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes:
Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:
Advanced search
275647
Posts in
27717
Topics by
4285
Members Latest Member:
-
Jason DAngelo
Most online today:
86
- most online ever:
565
(October 17, 2020, 02:08:06 PM)
The Forge Archives
Independent Game Forums
Half Meme Press
(Moderator:
Paul Czege
)
MLWM rule interpretation
Pages: [
1
]
« previous
next »
Author
Topic: MLWM rule interpretation (Read 4574 times)
jrs
Member
Posts: 373
MLWM rule interpretation
«
on:
September 29, 2003, 05:11:09 AM »
I have a couple questions about the die mechanics in MLWM after running our first session yesterday.
In the rules, there is the stipulation that a roll that would result in a negative pool would include 1 die. I assume that this also applies to zero die pools. Basically, there is always at least 1 die in a pool. I also want to make sure that the Intimacy, Desperation, or Sincerity dice are never rolled alone; there will always be at least one other d4 in the pool. Is this correct?
Ties. We had a tie in a Connection overture. I was not certain how to play this out. I decided to be strict in the tie interuption rule and decreed that although Self-Loathing did not increase, no Love was gained either. So, Pater Hode never noticed Minerva's shy attempt at conversation because Herr Gloeckl had rushed in hysterical over baby Inga's illness. Should I have granted Love anyway?
Cool game. I'm looking forward to our next session.
Julie
Logged
Paul Czege
Moderator
Member
Posts: 2341
MLWM rule interpretation
«
Reply #1 on:
September 29, 2003, 07:24:07 AM »
Hey Julie,
In the rules, there is the stipulation that a roll that would result in a negative pool would include 1 die. I assume that this also applies to zero die pools.
I'm not following the question. I think it's the "also" that's throwing me off. The rule is:
Some conflicts require a subtraction to determine the size of one of the opposed pools (e.g.
Love
minus
Weariness
). If a subtraction would result in a negative pool, that side of the conflict rolls a single die.[/list:u]What other kind of zero die pool would you have?
I also want to make sure that the Intimacy, Desperation, or Sincerity dice are never rolled alone; there will always be at least one other d4 in the pool. Is this correct?
Yes...because of the above rule.
We had a tie in a Connection overture....I decided to be strict in the tie interuption rule and decreed that although Self-Loathing did not increase, no Love was gained either. So, Pater Hode never noticed Minerva's shy attempt at conversation because Herr Gloeckl had rushed in hysterical over baby Inga's illness. Should I have granted Love anyway?
No. You handled it exactly right. And beautifully, I might add.
Paul
Logged
My Life with Master
knows codependence.
And if you're doing anything with your
Acts of Evil
ashcan license
, of course I'm curious and would love to hear about your plans
ethan_greer
Member
Posts: 869
MLWM rule interpretation
«
Reply #2 on:
September 29, 2003, 08:06:05 AM »
The distinction is that zero is not a negative number, Paul. So a pool with zero dice is not technically a negative pool, but a pool with no dice. Since in Real Life you can't have a negative number of physical objects, a negative pool would also be zero dice, but hey, this is math we're talking about... :)
Logged
jrs
Member
Posts: 373
MLWM rule interpretation
«
Reply #3 on:
September 29, 2003, 08:22:44 AM »
Paul,
What Ethan said. Zero is just ... zero. I must be reading the rules too literally; damn that math education! I think you did answer my question: always roll at least one d4. When the calculated pool size is 1, 0 or -2; still roll 1 d4.
And thanks for affirming my decision in the overture tie, I was starting to second guess myself there.
Julie
Logged
Paul Czege
Moderator
Member
Posts: 2341
MLWM rule interpretation
«
Reply #4 on:
September 29, 2003, 08:35:04 AM »
I think you did answer my question: always roll at least one d4.
Ah...cripes. There's my first errata.
Paul
Logged
My Life with Master
knows codependence.
And if you're doing anything with your
Acts of Evil
ashcan license
, of course I'm curious and would love to hear about your plans
Pages: [
1
]
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Welcome to the Archives
-----------------------------
=> Welcome to the Archives
-----------------------------
General Forge Forums
-----------------------------
=> First Thoughts
=> Playtesting
=> Endeavor
=> Actual Play
=> Publishing
=> Connections
=> Conventions
=> Site Discussion
-----------------------------
Archive
-----------------------------
=> RPG Theory
=> GNS Model Discussion
=> Indie Game Design
-----------------------------
Independent Game Forums
-----------------------------
=> Adept Press
=> Arkenstone Publishing
=> Beyond the Wire Productions
=> Black and Green Games
=> Bully Pulpit Games
=> Dark Omen Games
=> Dog Eared Designs
=> Eric J. Boyd Designs
=> Errant Knight Games
=> Galileo Games
=> glyphpress
=> Green Fairy Games
=> Half Meme Press
=> Incarnadine Press
=> lumpley games
=> Muse of Fire Games
=> ndp design
=> Night Sky Games
=> one.seven design
=> Robert Bohl Games
=> Stone Baby Games
=> These Are Our Games
=> Twisted Confessions
=> Universalis
=> Wild Hunt Studios
-----------------------------
Inactive Forums
-----------------------------
=> My Life With Master Playtest
=> Adamant Entertainment
=> Bob Goat Press
=> Burning Wheel
=> Cartoon Action Hour
=> Chimera Creative
=> CRN Games
=> Destroy All Games
=> Evilhat Productions
=> HeroQuest
=> Key 20 Publishing
=> Memento-Mori Theatricks
=> Mystic Ages Online
=> Orbit
=> Scattershot
=> Seraphim Guard
=> Wicked Press
=> Review Discussion
=> XIG Games
=> SimplePhrase Press
=> The Riddle of Steel
=> Random Order Creations
=> Forge Birthday Forum