|
Post by malifer on Mar 5, 2013 5:51:09 GMT -8
Which of the AW games has the best Social Conflict "moves"?
I am curious in how the mechanic works in both Player vs Player and PC vs NPC? Or maybe there is no difference at all.
My limited understanding is that a player needs to understand in this game their character can be Mind Controlled, just how players tend to treat NPCs.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Mar 5, 2013 6:16:29 GMT -8
Limited experience with them, but based on what I've heard and my understanding I think Monster Hearts probably has the best social conflict moves.
JiB
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 5, 2013 18:06:39 GMT -8
Monsterhearts is mostly about PvP (or is most interesting when that's happening) and has some god ones.
Monsterhearts Because Monsterhearts deals with sex, the author was very careful to leave as much agency in the hands of the target as possible. You can get into very ugly situations (read: rape) when one character can completely control another (something D&D has never addressed with it's charm spells) and the game tries to avoid that whenever possible.
The most direct way to influence another PC in Monsterhearts is to spend a String on that character and offer the player XP to do what you want. That happened several times in the AP I posted in the General Gaming forums. "January, you can mark XP if you let Cage spend the night with us." "Cage, you can mark XP if we leave right now." and so on. The player you're asking has complete control over whether their character says yes or no, and the player asking looses their String regardless of the answer.
It's different if you want to manipulate an NPC. In that case you make the manipulate an NPC move and roll dice. On a strong hit, the person does what you want if you give them a reason to. On a weak hit, the MC (GM) will tell you what it will take to get the person to comply with your wishes.
The important thing here is that you need leverage on the person you're trying to manipulate. You can't just get people to do things for no reason. You have to give them a compelling reason to do what you're asking/telling them. Say there's a football player acting as lookout while a drug deal goes down in the boys bathroom. Your PC can't just walk up, say "Let me in." and expect the guy to stand aside. Why is he going to do that? If, on the other hand, your PC walks up and says "Yo. Let me in there, or the whole school's going to know about that stash of gay porn you keep in your locker." well, now we're cooking with gas and you can make the move. Assuming, of course, what you said is true and the guy actually is secretly gay. You need to give the NPC real motivation, even if it's "Move or I'm going to kick the shit out of you." But again, you have to apear capable of following through or it doesn't count.
Apocalypse World Apocalypse World also does a really good job in my opinion. Manipulating or seducing an NPC works similar to Monsterhearts; you need some kind of leverage before you can ask/tell the NPC what you want. Then you roll. On a strong hit, you have to promise the NPC something they want to get them to comply, but you can choose to break that promise later. On a weak hit, the NPC will comply, but you have to give them some concrete assurance right now that you'll make good on your promise.
The concrete assurance right now should be related to whatever you're promising the NPC. Seducing someone with a promise of sex? Maybe kiss them or let them cop a feel right now to show that you're serious. Promising violence if they don't do what you ask? Knock out a tooth or give them a big old black eye to prove you mean business. Offering them money? Drop some jingle in their palm and tell them there's more to follow if they do as you're asking.
Manipulating a PC is a little different. You still need leverage, but on a strong hit, they mark XP if they do what you ask, and are acting under fire if they refuse. So, both the carrot (XP) and the stick (acting under fire). On a weak hit, you choose one or the other. The carrot or the stick. But not both.
Mind Control Both Apocalypse World and Monsterhearts do have straight up mind control, but it's only available to certain characters.
In Apocalypse World The Brainer can implant a command in someone, when they have time and intimacy with that person. On a strong hit the Brainer gets 3 hold, and on a weak hit they get 1 hold. They can spend that hold 1 for 1 at any time and under any circumstances to either inflict 1-harm (ap) on the target, or to give the target -1. When the target completes the command, all the hold disappears. So the target has free will, the Brainer can just fuck their shit up real bad until the command is completed.
In Monsterhearts The Vampire can hypnotize people that have no Strings on them. On a strong hit, the target does exactly what The Vampire told them to do, and have no idea that anything weird happened. On a weak hit, the target does as instructed, but the Vampire has to choose one; the target realizes they were hypnotized, the target fucks up the commands, or the target's sanity is unhinged. That can be pretty messed up if you hit another PC with it. I've heard that some groups refuse to play with The Vampire because of this move.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Mar 6, 2013 16:13:26 GMT -8
Okay. Now what I'm wondering is if there is a mechanic to handle an opposed Social Conflict. A War of Words. Obviously an argument, but I also thinking slightly differently. Examples of what I'm trying to get to In the Hobbit there is the Game of Riddles between Bilbo and Gollum. In the 4th issue of Neil Gaiman's Sandman there is a battle of wits between the title character and a demon. 1871atboe.tumblr.com/post/27148032933/the-battle-of-wits-between-choronzon-and-morpheus-atI think these are common tropes in stories and I would prefer to involve a little more back and forth than one adjudication. I feel like there should be a chance for rebuttal for the PC, if they wish to. FATE is the only game I am familiar with that can do this with it's Social Stress Track. It would take a few "hits" to humiliate you or force concession.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 6, 2013 17:23:34 GMT -8
Short answer? No. Apocalypse World games don't do opposed rolls. The closest you get to an opposed roll, even between two PCs, is mutual interference, as shown by an example towards the back of the AW book. Player A and player B are attempting to size each other up with the read a person move. Both are also trying to give away as little information as possible to the other player. The MC has both players roll+Hx to interfere with the other player. Each player who gets a hit (a 7+) will give the other player a -2 penalty to their read a person move. That's it. So it sounds like a War of Words or an argument would be resolved with a single manipulate/seduce move, with how convincing your argument is being your leverage. Or the player can read a person to get an idea of what their target wants or is trying to do, and use that as leverage. Remember though, it's really easy to make custom moves for AW-based games. They look like this: When you [fictional trigger], roll+[stat]. On a 10+ [something really good]. On a 7-9 [some mixed result or hard choice]. On a miss [bad shit happens]. Like this: When you ask Gollum a riddle, roll+sharp. On a 10+, you've stumped him; he'll keep his word and do what he promised. On a 7-9, choose one: - he answers correctly, but is enjoying the game and wants to continue. If you answer his riddle correctly, you can ask again, but take -1forward each time you choose this option. - he's stumped and can't answer. The game ends, but Gollum decides if he keeps his word or not. On a miss, he's really, really hungry.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 6, 2013 18:43:17 GMT -8
By the way, malifer. I forgot to ask what flavor of * World game you're running. I tend to use Apocalypse World for all my examples and clarifications, as it's the "daddy" of the system. Dungeon World has the parley move, which is exactly the same as seduce/manipulate from AW.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Mar 7, 2013 10:16:55 GMT -8
Thank for the input Hyve.
Parley - check.
I don't really like the idea of adding an opposed roll mechanic, but I'm not really satisfied with the current model for this specific case.
I'm currently reading and planning Dungeon World, but I have Monster of the Week too.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 7, 2013 18:21:19 GMT -8
In the "Advanced Fuckery" chapter of Apocalypse World (heh, I love how that book is written), there's another example of a custom move: Things are tough. Whenever a player's character makes a move, the MC judges it normal, difficult, or crazy difficult. If it's difficult, the player takes -1 to the roll. If it's crazy difficult, the player takes -2 to the roll. Vincent (the author) then goes on to say that a lot of groups asked for this move or something similar during playtesting, but all of the groups dropped it after only a single session. It didn't add anything to the game except an extra step of hassle for every single move. That being said, it's a perfectly legal move, and could be used as a custom move for specific NPCs or situations. Something like this: High Priest Killroy's faith in Bahumet is nigh unshakable. When you try to get him to act against the interests of his faith, take -2 to your parley roll. I realize that's not really what you're asking for, but as NPCs don't ever roll in AW games, one way to simulate difficulty is by applying negative modifiers to the player's rolls. Sorry I couldn't be more help with the Riddle Game question. I'm still not exactly sure what you're trying to do with it though. Are you going to have the players arguing against an NPC, like a town elder or a politician? Or are they going to run up against something like a Sphinx?
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Mar 8, 2013 4:15:19 GMT -8
Oh no, you were a big help Hyve. I don't mind needing to figure something out, but I wanted to make sure it didn't already exist. But I also don't want to "add" anything that doesn't flow with the basics. Like you mention it might be as simple as a Hack/Slash in which - 1-6 - A vicious tongue-lashing is set upon you
- 7-9 - You chew them out and they reciprocate
- 10-12 - You come down on them hard
As for what I am trying to do it. Argue with a NPC or PC. I can use the above for an NPC, but I don't really like it for a PC. Also run up against a Sphinx. This may entail two different moves. And I could see with the Sphinx using Defy Danger, but it needs to be more than just one roll. Another example I could think of (from the Hobbit) is Bilbo's interaction with Smaug. In standard D&D Bilbo would just back-stab Smaug until someone died. But in the story Bilbo is actually in danger because Smaug is a fucking dragon and you don't just walk up to one and start poking it with a glowing butter knife. So a battle of wits begins. A couple more examples is how to emulate Sherlock Holmes vs Prof Moriarty or a game of chess. One roll just doesn't seem sufficiant.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 8, 2013 5:45:00 GMT -8
Defy Danger is my "go to" move in Dungeon World. It's the "this doesn't trigger any of the other moves, but the PC shouldn't just be able to narrate a success" move. I love how the stat added to the die roll is left entirely up to the situation. There were probably a couple of Defy Danger moves in the scene with Bilbo and Smaug. One with WIS for Bilbo to muster the courage to approach the dragon. Another with DEX to move silently one he was inside the beast's lair. A third with CHA to keep Smaug talking and distracted. And finally another one with DEX again (or possibly CON) to make it back up the tunnel fast enough to avoid the fireball. But in the story Bilbo is actually in danger because Smaug is a fucking dragon and you don't just walk up to one and start poking it with a glowing butter knife. So a battle of wits begins. It's funny you mentioned that scenario, as it's part of the notes for the Hack & Slash move. A couple of posters were wondering why the Dragon in the monster section only had 26 HP and 5 Armor. They were saying that a dragon should have way more HP and armor. The authors pointed them to this section of the Hack & Slash description: Note that an “attack” is some action that a player undertakes that has a chance of causing physical harm to someone else. Attacking a dragon with inch-thick metal scales full of magical energy using a typical sword is like swinging a meat cleaver at a tank: it just isn’t going to cause any harm, so hack and slash doesn’t apply. Note that circumstances can change that: if you’re in a position to stab the dragon on its soft underbelly (good luck with getting there) it could hurt, so it’s an attack. To spot Smaug's missing scale, Bilbo either used Spout Lore or Discern Realities. If he used Spot Lore and got a 10+, then the GM could have told him that ancient dragons usually have a soft spot somewhere, but then it would be up to the player to actually find it. If Bilbo used Discern Realities, one of his questions could have been "What here is useful or valuable to me?" or "What here is not what it appears to be?" Both questions could have revealed Smaug's weak spot.
|
|