Episode 3

[EricaOdd]

Long before this AP started, some of the HJ crew explained the X card and I came up with my own version to use in my Dragon Age campaign. (Like the video game, sometimes the Dragon Age RPG can go into some dark territory, so I thought it would be appropriate.)

I came up with a yellow X and a red X. Hitting the yellow X (like the traffic light, CAUTION) is a calling for an end to the scene. The triggering event still happens, but it's a "fade to black" moment. Hitting the red X (STOP!) is the more serious version. That's the one to stop and end the scene and not even go there at all and it never happened. Neither X needs to be discussed or explained at all unless the person who hit it wants to.

Ultimately my group decided not to use them, but I'll bring the idea back when and if I run Monsterhearts.

[ayslyn]

Quibble tappy….

I disagree that it is only for traumatic, or triggering events. I also would include uncomfortable. I understand that some people might not have a problem articulating why they are uncomfortable, but others might not.

[tomes]

Jun 13, 2018 14:34:17 GMT -8 tappy said:

But it does not fulfill the function of the "X" card and i think using it instead of an "X" card is a bad idea.

Some fair points. Although even with the "x" card for someone to click the button / X, and completely not tell you what they have a problem with has its own problems... like us not knowing what you are having an issue with. I'm not talking about telling us WHY you have an issue with a thing, just what thing we're removing from the game.

But all that said, I agree with you that the script change thing is a little more "complex" then necessary, and that's why I run with an X card (it is the most popular of the tools) but I use it more like the script change tool. Click the X to: remove content (rewind), take a break, fade-to-black. "The door is always open"... i.e. the X-card is a reminder to take care of yourself and if that means leaving the table, using the bathroom, WHATEVER, do it.

So I hear you. And in some ways agree.

[tappy]

Jun 13, 2018 15:21:15 GMT -8 ayslyn said:

Quibble tappy….

I disagree that it is only for traumatic, or triggering events. I also would include uncomfortable. I understand that some people might not have a problem articulating why they are uncomfortable, but others might not.

that is totally fine, and I agree. but yeah, you shouldn't feel like you have to explain or somehow defend your use of an x-card even if you are squicked out or uncomfortable.. use it, scene is over, go.

[tappy]

Jun 13, 2018 15:15:13 GMT -8 EricaOdd said:

Long before this AP started, some of the HJ crew explained the X card and I came up with my own version to use in my Dragon Age campaign. (Like the video game, sometimes the Dragon Age RPG can go into some dark territory, so I thought it would be appropriate.)

I came up with a yellow X and a red X. Hitting the yellow X (like the traffic light, CAUTION) is a calling for an end to the scene. The triggering event still happens, but it's a "fade to black" moment. Hitting the red X (STOP!) is the more serious version. That's the one to stop and end the scene and not even go there at all and it never happened. Neither X needs to be discussed or explained at all unless the person who hit it wants to.

Ultimately my group decided not to use them, but I'll bring the idea back when and if I run Monsterhearts.

That is exactly their use in the kink scene, and where I am pretty sure where the idea for the X card came from.

[SirGuido]

Jun 13, 2018 9:36:12 GMT -8 hoobuk said:

SirGuido , we had a long discussion about that moment. It hit several of us very hard, myself included. It’s rare that a moment in a game can touch us so deeply. As hard as it was, it was such a beautiful and honest moment, I wouldn’t trade it for the world. I hope even though it was hard for you, I hope it meant something. We’ve been talking about how the 5 of us love this game because it lets us revisit some of these issues that traumatized us in high school, but now we’re in control.

Don’t give up on running Monsterhearts! It’s a beautiful game, and you can actually play it light hearted or campy too, to make it easier. But playing it like we’re playing it is indeed very difficult. We’ve also been surprised at how special and also how raw it’s become for us.

Oh it was definitely a very beautiful and honest moment, and I was sort of shocked at my own reaction to it. It made me realize how far I've come since high school and in reality, how I've never really left it behind like I assumed. That me is still in there, just armored in the new me. I still have those moments when I want to scream at myself that everything is my fault and if I wasn't the worst things would be better and that's why I have no friends, etc. Its still there. I mean, I posted on here before that as a GM I have a very very bad complex. I have had players tell me that they've had their best experiences at my table, that they were able to explore their characters better than they ever had before, and yet I still question if I should still be a GM. The good never gets to me as much as the bad. All these players saying they love my games just falls right out of my head, but the one time I run a PBP on this forum and lose several players and the game kind of stalls... that sticks in my head forever. I mean, since that PBP I haven't really GM'd at all. It really did a number on my confidence. That's just who I am now. BUT, in my teen years I'd have been absolutely terrified to GM a game. The fact that adult me not only has tried it, but done it a lot and gotten compliments is a testament to how far I've come.

[hoobuk]

We can only keep going forward, hoping that we’ll get a little stronger. Like we talked about on instagram, I feel constantly inadequate running games, despite my players (and now all y’all) telling me that my games are good. I try to just smile and say thank you, knowing that my friends are smarter about me than I am, so maybe I should believe them.

[HyveMynd]

I've avoided reading these threads as I'm behind on the AP, but as I'm almost done listening to episode three, I figured I'd pop in.

I see a few people having emotional reactions to the events of this episode, and guess what?

It's not the sexy teenage monster times or getting to correct the mistakes of high school that make me love this game, though that is part of it. The reason I love Monsterhearts as hard as I do is because it has the potential to create (or even reveal) these raw moments of honest emotion. I feel you should absolutely play this game with an X Card, because you never know when something is going to hit you like a frigging freight train right in the feels. Sometimes you have to step away from the table, or in this case take off the headphones, so you can collect yourself and calm down.

Monsterhearts provides a safe space to explore so much about who you, the player, are, in a way that I've not experienced in other roleplaying games.

[HyveMynd]

Back on the mechanics train, I don't think I would have called for a Lash Out Physically roll when Oliver went to restrain Max. Oliver's intent wasn't to cause physical harm (though that may have been an unintended side effect), but to prevent Max from hurting himself any further. That possibly could have been a Keep Your Cool roll, as it might have been rather scary for Oilver to grab a bleeding Max who still has a shard of glass in their hands.

Another thing that got mentioned towards the beginning of the episode when Ivy, Oliver, and Max all fled from the basement. The lack of a perception roll. Yup. The game doesn't have a "notice stuff" move. Gaze Into the Abyss is it, and the PC has to do something get high, stab themselves with a pencil, have a Google montage, etc.) to trigger it.

I feel this is by design though. Being a teenager is scary, confusing, and you don't really have to tools to deal with what's going on. If you want to know things, you have to ask other people (and hope they tell the truth), or go investigating yourself.

From the MC's standpoint though, I feel the game is less about if the PCs notice something and more about what they do with the information they get. If the PCs are in a position to see, hear, or otherwise sense something, the MC should provide that information. The MC acts as the characters senses, and should be both fair and liberal with the information they share. It's not that interesting to find out if a character notices their girlfriend making out with someone in a darkened corner at the party. It's way more fun and interesting to see what the character does about it. That took me a while to understand as MC.

Keep Your Cool is a good catch all move when you feel that a move is triggered but can't really decide which one. But another thing you can do is simply make an MC move, called a Reaction in second edition. Getting back to the Oliver and Max example above, @stragelikethat could have said "OK Oliver. You can absolutely restrain Max, but you're really going to have to wrestle him down, taking 1-harm from that glass shard in the process. Sound good?" (That's Telling them the possible consequences and ask.) Or possibly "Oliver, you restrain Max, but you have to hold him so tightly you accidentally dislocate his shoulder. That's 2-harm Max." (That's Inflicting harm.) Basically, if everyone at the table looks at the MC to see what happens, if it feels like the situation should be a "make a roll" but no other move is triggered, then make a Reaction. Again, it took me a while to get that.

I am absolutely loving the AP, am fucking ecstatic that Monsterhearts is being played as a Happy Jacks game, and am hopefully not coming across as criticising people.

[HyveMynd]

Oh jesus christ gina. You just broke me with poor Ivy.

[tappy]

Jun 19, 2018 0:32:26 GMT -8 HyveMynd said:

Back on the mechanics train, I don't think I would have called for a Lash Out Physically roll when Oliver went to restrain Max. Oliver's intent wasn't to cause physical harm (though that may have been an unintended side effect), but to prevent Max from hurting himself any further. That possibly could have been a Keep Your Cool roll, as it might have been rather scary for Oilver to grab a bleeding Max who still has a shard of glass in their hands.

Another thing that got mentioned towards the beginning of the episode when Ivy, Oliver, and Max all fled from the basement. The lack of a perception roll. Yup. The game doesn't have a "notice stuff" move. Gaze Into the Abyss is it, and the PC has to do something get high, stab themselves with a pencil, have a Google montage, etc.) to trigger it.

I feel this is by design though. Being a teenager is scary, confusing, and you don't really have to tools to deal with what's going on. If you want to know things, you have to ask other people (and hope they tell the truth), or go investigating yourself.

From the MC's standpoint though, I feel the game is less about if the PCs notice something and more about what they do with the information they get. If the PCs are in a position to see, hear, or otherwise sense something, the MC should provide that information. The MC acts as the characters senses, and should be both fair and liberal with the information they share. It's not that interesting to find out if a character notices their girlfriend making out with someone in a darkened corner at the party. It's way more fun and interesting to see what the character does about it. That took me a while to understand as MC.

Keep Your Cool is a good catch all move when you feel that a move is triggered but can't really decide which one. But another thing you can do is simply make an MC move, called a Reaction in second edition. Getting back to the Oliver and Max example above, @stragelikethat could have said "OK Oliver. You can absolutely restrain Max, but you're really going to have to wrestle him down, taking 1-harm from that glass shard in the process. Sound good?" (That's Telling them the possible consequences and ask.) Or possibly "Oliver, you restrain Max, but you have to hold him so tightly you accidentally dislocate his shoulder. That's 2-harm Max." (That's Inflicting harm.) Basically, if everyone at the table looks at the MC to see what happens, if it feels like the situation should be a "make a roll" but no other move is triggered, then make a Reaction. Again, it took me a while to get that.

I am absolutely loving the AP, am fucking ecstatic that Monsterhearts is being played as a Happy Jacks game, and am hopefully not coming across as criticising people.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here, even though I can see what you are trying to say.

Using volatile at that moment is perfectly cromulent as it was a violent, opposed moment. If this were Apoc world (1st ed), I would have called for a "seize by force" roll instead of a "do something under fire" roll even though "seize by force" is technically the "fight-y" move.. "Lash out physically" is the analogue for "seize by force" and I would absolutely use it in the same manner. You could even say that a custom move was made in that moment (something I have done a lot of in AW) that used volatile to resolve it.

When it comes to the "notice stuff" roll, well that depends. I would disagree that "gaze into the abyss" could not be used to notice something, as moves are incredibly general. Furthermore, as we have talked about, moves overlap in certain situations. I could also make an argument that in certain situations "keep your cool" can be used for a perception roll.

When you are playing a game like Monsterhearts where there are only 6 (7 if you count pulling strings) moves, then moves MUST be extremely versatile. "Keep your cool", while VERY broad, is not going to be the only move applied for all human (and inhuman) existence. Moves will overlap and conflict at times, and it is up to each group to interpret which move and which stat they use for different situations... and it is ALL correct. OF COURSE there is a "perception" roll, it is just not necessarily any one move, and can change depending on what you are doing. Or, much like above, you can even create a custom move for each different situation... because this is PtbA. Gaze into the abyss might not "technically" be a perception move, but you can just create a perception move FOR THAT SITUATION that says "roll +dark. On a 7-9 you notice it, but are freaked the fuck out by it, on a 10+ you hear it and know exactly where it is" or something like that. That "custom" move is essentially the same thing as gaze into the abyss, but is a custom mvre for that situation. I would even say that, if you were following a person that a tracking vampire has fed upon, that the move "marked for the hunt" applies because it falls under the jurisdiction of the move, even though it is technically only for "gaze into the abyss".

This game is about how messy and confusing life is and things are going to be weird. ESPECIALLY in a game where we have gone way beyond RAW. You should choose how to interpret the moves for how the game is playing for you, and I think that using volatile in that moment was great, as it really showed how Oliver had lost control of the situation. If it were +cool, he would very much have been in control of himself and the sitch. In a game where we have deviated from RAW in an spectacular manner with the very "masks" interpretation of what monsters can do that is mentioned NOWHERE in the book, arguments like this seem academic at best, and at worst would lead new players to believe that there is one "right" way to play PbtA which can be nerve wracking when there are very few training wheels for the game.

Mac is doing a fantastic job in this game, and is really showing how this game SHOULD be played... rolling with the punches and making judgement calls as she sees fit. Adam is doing the same thing, making judgement calls that are not RAW. Did you know that the dark power cannot technically refuse a string, especially when the Infernal is not in their darkest self? Yet somehow that happened, which trapped Rose in the backyard and set her up for the horrible scene with the shears and then getting saved. Why isn't anyone harping on that? Because it created an important moment of drama that the game is hinging upon. What would have happened if Adam had strictly cleaved to how stuff "should" work? we would have lost all of that. But that REALLY isn't how the dark power or the Infernal works. I don't think anyone is harping on that decision because of what it did for the story, but it is even more "wrong" than using the "incorrect" move/stat for a situation.

I love this game, and how moves can be made on the fly or the rules are interpreted. I think there is a TON of room to discuss how rules have been interpreted in episodes as the game goes on. In fact is REALLY look forward to these conversations, both in the discord and here. I love talking about when things should be triggering a move and semantics about what to call things and why. You all know I live for this hair-splitting bullshit.

There is no right way to have fun, and I believe there is no "right" way to interpret a move... if it deviates from how you think it should be interpreted, then just consider it a custom move that is called the same thing for shorthand and can we please move on. Your game can interpret things differently too, and that is awesome. This is really all just minutia anyway (which is why I love passionately discussing it).

Ok, I think I have now said the same thing 20! different ways, so I'll shut up now. I'm so glad you like the game, I look forward to more discussion about crazy in-game bullshit, and thank you for your comments.

[joecrak]

Because we all enjoy these discussions and back and forths!

Jun 20, 2018 7:18:47 GMT -8 tappy said:

I'm going to have to disagree with you here, even though I can see what you are trying to say.

Using volatile at that moment is perfectly cromulent as it was a violent, opposed moment. If this were Apoc world (1st ed), I would have called for a "seize by force" roll instead of a "do something under fire" roll even though "seize by force" is technically the "fight-y" move.. "Lash out physically" is the analogue for "seize by force" and I would absolutely use it in the same manner. You could even say that a custom move was made in that moment (something I have done a lot of in AW) that used volatile to resolve it.

I agree with HyveMynd that Lashing out Physically doesn't make as much sense in that situation for Oliver. When you Lash out Physically, you are trying to hurt someone, not contain them. It's always felt more more of an analogue to "Go Aggro" than "Seize by Force", as the results of the move are about dealing harm, and hopefully preventing them from doing anything in return. Oliver "Keeping his cool" can make sense in the situation, as shit's tense, and he doesn't want to make it worse.

Jun 20, 2018 7:18:47 GMT -8 tappy said:

When you are playing a game like Monsterhearts where there are only 6 (7 if you count pulling strings) moves, then moves MUST be extremely versatile. "Keep your cool", while VERY broad, is not going to be the only move applied for all human (and inhuman) existence. Moves will overlap and conflict at times, and it is up to each group to interpret which move and which stat they use for different situations... and it is ALL correct. OF COURSE there is a "perception" roll, it is just not necessarily any one move, and can change depending on what you are doing. Or, much like above, you can even create a custom move for each different situation... because this is PtbA. Gaze into the abyss might not "technically" be a perception move, but you can just create a perception move FOR THAT SITUATION that says "roll +dark. On a 7-9 you notice it, but are freaked the fuck out by it, on a 10+ you hear it and know exactly where it is" or something like that. That "custom" move is essentially the same thing as gaze into the abyss, but is a custom mvre for that situation. I would even say that, if you were following a person that a tracking vampire has fed upon, that the move "marked for the hunt" applies because it falls under the jurisdiction of the move, even though it is technically only for "gaze into the abyss".

If y'all want to create custom moves, go for it! Tell us all about them! But please, be sure to tell the players too, because they should know what they might want to try and trigger, or what they are triggering. I'd just be careful about creating a custom move about "perception", because it just doesn't feel impotant enough to have a move about it. The move wouldn't add much to the feeling of playing out a messy teenage life, and all the moves that do exist, fit that theme perfectly. Either see something or don't see something. I vote for just saying they see the thing, now they have to deal with it, what do they do?!

As for for moves needing to be extremely versatile in a 6 or 7 basic move game, that is a whole other discussion we have. I've been swayed to the believe in pbta games, if there isn't a move for a thing, you will just invite a GM move. Because the game doesn't care about you doing that thing, or want you doing that thing. Or a better way to put it, since there isn't a move for it, the GM gets to make up what happens, and they should use that opportunity to ramp up the tension/danger.

Jun 20, 2018 7:18:47 GMT -8 tappy said:

If it were +cool, he would very much have been in control of himself and the sitch. In a game where we have deviated from RAW in an spectacular manner with the very "masks" interpretation of what monsters can do that is mentioned NOWHERE in the book, arguments like this seem academic at best, and at worst would lead new players to believe that there is one "right" way to play PbtA which can be nerve wracking when there are very few training wheels for the game.

I think i mentioned before about Oliver keeping his cool, but the disagreement here would be if he was rolling to "Keep your cool" for me, it doesn't mean he's in control of himself, and the sitch, it means he's trying to keep control because the situation is tense.

The "masks" interpretation is always an amusing and interesting conversation, because, as we talked about on discord, I've never seen a game where it was played differently than how you are playing it. We've had vampires that shapeshift into bats and mist and werewolves that can shift whenever they want. It's their playbook and they get to determine the rules of their supernatural abilities. The only rule we've ever followed is if a playbook has a specific move that exists(and that playbook is being used), then that move must be taken to do that thing.

Honestly, that should be put in the book to help so many other players out, plus, I could have sworn I'd heard Avery run it that way herself.

Jun 20, 2018 7:18:47 GMT -8 tappy said:

Mac is doing a fantastic job in this game, and is really showing how this game SHOULD be played... rolling with the punches and making judgement calls as she sees fit.

100% AGREE!

Jun 20, 2018 7:18:47 GMT -8 tappy said:

Adam is doing the same thing, making judgement calls that are not RAW. Did you know that the dark power cannot technically refuse a string, especially when the Infernal is not in their darkest self? Yet somehow that happened, which trapped Rose in the backyard and set her up for the horrible scene with the shears and then getting saved. Why isn't anyone harping on that? Because it created an important moment of drama that the game is hinging upon. What would have happened if Adam had strictly cleaved to how stuff "should" work? we would have lost all of that. But that REALLY isn't how the dark power or the Infernal works. I don't think anyone is harping on that decision because of what it did for the story, but it is even more "wrong" than using the "incorrect" move/stat for a situation.

Heh. I won't deny, in the moment when listening I was saying to myself. Um...the Dark Power can't do that...I didn't harp on it or anything, because I thought, "They probably don't know, and it's probably only a one time thing". Adam didn't seem to mind, but if he did, I hope he would have spoken up about it.

I'm of the mind that the MC should respect the players skin moves, and allow them to happen when they come up to be used. If it says they can do the thing, then they can do the thing, otherwise it can feel like "Oh great, I chose this move cause I thought it was cool, but now I'm not allowed to do the cool thing". Luckily this wasn't the case for y'all, but you also have the luxury of knowing and trusting each other. Some moves are more complex and need more discussion, luckily, this is one of the simpler one's, where it's a simple exchange.

As for the scene in question, no one can say what would have happened is Adam had used his move as it's written. Sure, you may have lost what happened, but you would have gained something else, that's the beauty of these games, as we both know. Something is always happening. Like, Adam could have flown after, and some others could have seen him and taken some pictures, leading to more delectable future badness. [/quote]

Jun 20, 2018 7:18:47 GMT -8 tappy said:

I love this game, and how moves can be made on the fly or the rules are interpreted. I think there is a TON of room to discuss how rules have been interpreted in episodes as the game goes on. In fact is REALLY look forward to these conversations, both in the discord and here. I love talking about when things should be triggering a move and semantics about what to call things and why. You all know I live for this hair-splitting bullshit.

There is no right way to have fun, and I believe there is no "right" way to interpret a move... if it deviates from how you think it should be interpreted, then just consider it a custom move that is called the same thing for shorthand and can we please move on.

Get ready for some hair-splitting BS then, because I will argue to some point in time about how that's not how that works! Rassmafrassa! custom move with the same name. Harumph I say! Harumph!

Other than that bit, the no "right" way to interpret a move is something I could discuss you for quite some time. Especially if we are talking about the basic moves. They mostly feel very specifically designed to leave little room for interpretation.

When you turn someone on...Got it makes, sense, get them hot and bothered.
When you keep your cool and act despite fear. Okay, keeping calm, i get it.
When you run away. Sounds like you are fleeing the scene
When you lash out physically Well, obviously we have a difference of opinion here, but for me, sounds like I have to try and hurt someone with my firsts, or something else physical.
When you gaze into the abyss, name what you are looking for Yeah, this can be quite confusing for people not used to it.
When you shut someone down This has caused the most confusion that I have seen, as many ask "What does that mean?" That's why I like the 1e One sheet that John Stavropoulos put together. He defined the trigger as "When you socially harm someone" And that always felt tighter for me, and more easily understood by most players. It's the insult move.

Like there was that moment when Oliver saw Max and Ivy talking in the hall. And I think Oliver rolled to run away? (forgive the memory), but then described an outcome that sounded like he was trying to shut them down after he rolled and chose to cause a big scene.

Anyway...um...yeah...I guess i feel some moves are more prone to multiple interpretations than others.


Anyway...why must it be so long til the next session, i want more teen monster drama now!!!! Also, please go back to reading out the moves when you roll them. Like Stan Lee, treat every episode like it's someone's first, plus, i find it incredibly important for Keep your cool rolls. Y'all are just rolling without naming what you are afraid of, and that's such a good part of the move!

[tappy]

Jun 20, 2018 16:30:24 GMT -8 joecrak said:

Because we all enjoy these discussions and back and forths!

We do indeed, lets get to it. Most of the meat, I think, of the disagreement happens here, so I'm jumping all the other stuff to focus on this bit.

Other than that bit, the no "right" way to interpret a move is something I could discuss you for quite some time. Especially if we are talking about the basic moves. They mostly feel very specifically designed to leave little room for interpretation.

Ok we are going to go round and round on this, I am sure. Basic moves pretty much always leave room for interpretation, or else they would not be basic moves. If the entire sum of a character's life can be shown using these 6 (7 if you count "pulling strings"), then they MUST be open for interpretation. Some have fewer edge cases than others, but all must be interpreted to a certain degree. Ok, lets get to it!

When you turn someone on...Got it makes, sense, get them hot and bothered.

Ok, lets start this hair-splitting extravaganza with a BANG! Turning someone on is specifically written for the genre... because it uses the mechanic of sexual excitement for all positive manipulation attempts. But not even that, pretty much all positive interactions all together. This is really what this move is about. It is about trying to make someone do something with positive reinforcement rather than negative... or establishing relationships based on these positive (often sexual) interactions.

That right there is open to a lot of interpretation. What to interpret AS a roll to turn someone on? If I make food for my friends, are they suddenly all more likely to have sex with me? Man, if only this were so. But in the context of Monsterhearts, it could, if it is interpreted to do so (unless someone is ace). But making dinner for everyone could be seen as not an attempt to turn people on... or maybe an attempt for just one person, who is really into the person making the food, while the other people at the dinner are too focused on each other or the food to notice.

The reason all this is focus through the lens of sexual excitement is because the writer is brilliant and is writing it into the bones of the system to make sure encounters of a sexual nature are at the forefront of the game. But I would disagree with the idea that only direct attempts to get someone hot and bothered fall under the wheelhouse of this move. And if you agree that situations OTHER than direct attempts to get someone "hot and bothered" are part of this move, then you agree it is up to interpretation.

When you keep your cool and act despite fear. Okay, keeping calm, i get it.

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA THERE!!!!! Slow down there, turbo. This is one to talk about for the ages. This move is INSANELY up for interpretation/

Now, in monsterhearts, because of how the basic moves are framed and the lens that is applied to them, yes, keeping calm is probably the most likely reason to use this move. But it is the child of "do something under fire" and written to basically the same parameters... just the lens is on being calm. But if you want to sneak past the school officer: keep your cool and act despite fear". When you want to throw the winning touchdown: Keep your cool and act despite fear. When you want to pick a lock: keep your cool and act despite fear. There is so much that this move CAN do that it is in some ways up to you to really interpret what it cannot.

For example, let's say a character is hacking into the school computer. You could totally look at that as a "keep your cool and act despite fear" because if you are caught you will be expelled and it is difficult etc. etc. etc. Or you would just call the entire thing as gazing into the abyss because you are hacking into the school's computer for information.

What about a character in a wrestling tournament? That is certainly violent lashing out, I was a wrestler in high school and I guarantee you that is a violent, dirty sport. But is it "keeping your cool and act despite fear" in the same way that throwing a winning touchdown is? I mean, they are both physical sports...

This is also in line with the idea put forward before that "lashing out physically is punching, not restraining" when Mac had a player roll +volatile. Now, real world examples don't exactly apply to any game, but this is all academic, so bear with me. Restraining anyone or any part of someone is MORE physically demanding than striking. This is even more so if you actually care about not hurting them. So why would the more demanding violent action be in the purview the less violent move? Wrestling and restraining is crazy difficult and requires intense violent action in order to be successful, so it is obviously +cold?

There is an intense level of interpretation than must be used with this move, SO MUCH MORE than just determining if you are scared or not.

When you run away. Sounds like you are fleeing the scene

Ok, this one is pretty straight forward, but there are edge cases. if you are trying to get to a safe place, you are probably using this move.

When you lash out physically Well, obviously we have a difference of opinion here, but for me, sounds like I have to try and hurt someone with my firsts, or something else physical.

I think the difference between our opinion is "does restraining count as lashing out". I think yes, as detailed above. Obviously, this move can be interpreted many different ways. I like to think of it more as violent movement fueled by malice of intent rather than just simple trying to punch someone in the head.

When you gaze into the abyss, name what you are looking for Yeah, this can be quite confusing for people not used to it.

Wait... that is all you are going to say about one of the most open-ended moves in the game? A move than can be literally looking for someone, psychically/magically looking for someone, electronically breaking into their records, or what have you? This move is SO up to interpretation, in boggles the mind.

When you shut someone down This has caused the most confusion that I have seen, as many ask "What does that mean?" That's why I like the 1e One sheet that John Stavropoulos put together. He defined the trigger as "When you socially harm someone" And that always felt tighter for me, and more easily understood by most players. It's the insult move.

Ahhhh. that might be why we are disagreeing like this. I dislike moves being "tighter" in scope. It is up to interpretation of that discrete moment that something that a player has done triggers a move, rather than tight definitions. Not every insult is shutting someone down, not every negative manipulation attempt is a shouting match. Threats are a great "shutting someone down" trigger, and one that doesn't necessarily socially harm someone nor insult them. It is the flip side to the positive manipulation of turn someone on... the use of negative manipulation. It is through the lens of social maneuvering and putdowns, but there are so many other possibilities for this move.

I do think many people like "tight definitions" for moves, which is why 2nd edition AW exists. And also why I personally dislike it in comparison to 1st edition.

Like there was that moment when Oliver saw Max and Ivy talking in the hall. And I think Oliver rolled to run away? (forgive the memory), but then described an outcome that sounded like he was trying to shut them down after he rolled and chose to cause a big scene.

I'm not entirely sure about this example, the devil is in the details

Anyway...um...yeah...I guess i feel some moves are more prone to multiple interpretations than others.

I agree with this 100%

Anyway...why must it be so long til the next session, i want more teen monster drama now!!!! Also, please go back to reading out the moves when you roll them. Like Stan Lee, treat every episode like it's someone's first, plus, i find it incredibly important for Keep your cool rolls. Y'all are just rolling without naming what you are afraid of, and that's such a good part of the move!

We all agree with this and are really trying to keep it in mind. keep reminding us! I wish we could play every week, or even twice a week. Thanks for these discussions, I really enjoy them.

[joecrak]

We found the crux! I prefer tighter definitions of what triggers a move, whereas you do not!

Like, if I'm MCing, and a player calls another "A basic bitch", I'm gonna tell them "Okay, roll to shut them down". Because if they succeed, that basic bitch is now a condition on that other character, and Shutting someone down is one of the two ways to give someone a condition. Also, because if I go by the tighter trigger that I said to enjoy, they are socially harming another, therefore they are shutting them down.

And since I'm on board with conditions being entirely social in nature, as well as entirely negative in nature, then that insult works perfectly for a shut someone down, regardless of whether the PC intended to trigger that move.

I've had so many discussions with so many people about the argument of intent vs action, and they've pretty much won me over to the side of intent not mattering when it comes to moves, it's all about what you do that triggers the move.


As for the restraining example in regards to keep your cool vs lash out physically. It's all how they describe what they are doing. If they say "I wrap my arms around them and slam them down to the ground and pin them there with my knee on their back" Heck yeah they are lashing out physically, because sounds like they are hurting the other person.

But if she says "I wrap my arms around them and try to pin his arms down so he'll stop cutting himself" That sounds more like a keep your cool, because they aren't describing hurting someone, plus they are likely afraid of the cutting utensil that's present.


As for why i didn't type much about Gaze into the abyss. I dunno? It's a weird move, but not that weird, It's what you do when you want to find stuff out, in a way that most others don't. The computer hacking is a new example for me, because I mostly see it go much darker, or moodier than that, but I see why a skin could do that for their trigger. I also see some MC's ask their players how they normally do the move, and have them always do it that way. The trigger for this one, for me, is about asking the questions, but they way they go about asking these questions is so thematically important.

It might be another issue where I prefer John S.'s version of the move, because I find it tighter and more easy to process for player and MC alike: "When you ask the abyss questions roll+DARK; on a 7+ it answers your questions; on a 10+ you choose one: Visions show you what you must do, gain +1 forward to doing it; Visions cure you, removing a condition. On a 7-9 you must first answer the abyss's questions, knowing the wrong person might find out.

I love this variation soooo much because of the 7-9 result, and having them ask their questions before rolling.

John also more clearly defines Turn someone on in his playsheet, "When you intimately arouse someone",I love this, right to the point, you are trying to arouse them, Cooking them food? Maybe, depends on how you describe it? but for me, the end goal is to make them aroused, and mechanically, get a string on them, because now they are turned on by you, and dealing with a feeling they likely don't want to be dealing with. It doesn't work for me as a positive interaction move, because then why not just call it "When you help someone". Mind you, I'm not opposed to that as a move, it maybe doesn't fit with the rest of the more aggressive feeling moves, but it would be another way to earn strings, which you can then use as leverage against others.


I could go on a whole thing about strings alone, and their weird nebulous nature, but I need to head to bed.

...so yeah...just more proof I prefer the more tightly defined triggers? C'est la vie!

[HyveMynd]

Whoops! I didn't mean to start a big old hair splitting / mechanics argument. As long as everyone's having fun discussing things, that's cool.

There have been other rules/mechanics things in previous episodes that made me go "Huh?" Me not mentioning them does make it seem like I'm picking on StrangeLikeThat for this one thing, which is totally not my intention. (The fact I've only mentioned something the female MC did is also not lost on me here. Ick.) Both her, and hoobuk, are doing a fantastic job MCing, and I am thoroughly enjoying this AP.

For me, the intent of the character's actions are what help me figure out which, or even if, a move triggers. The basic moves in Monsterhearts have some of the broadest triggers (by design, I'm sure), and me knowing what the character/player wants to achieve is often way more helpful than how they go about it. I read Lash Out Physically as the character intending to do physical harm. If the intent is something else, I go to another move, even if physical harm is a possible outcome of the action. I understand people have different interpretations, and didn't meant to imply anyone was wrong.