Barf Forth Apocalyptica

barf forth apocalyptica => Apocalypse World => Topic started by: ctrail on September 23, 2011, 03:34:21 AM

Title: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 23, 2011, 03:34:21 AM
When you have leverage over someone you can Manipulate them to get them to do what you want.
When is making a deal with someone manipulation, and when is it just making a deal? Every transaction could be viewed as manipulating someone into giving you something in return for the money which you are using as leverage, but that's tedious and I suspect not the intent of the rules. But what about paying someone to do something they wouldn't otherwise do? That could be a bribe, using Manipulation, or it could be offering a barter with strings attached (automatically hitting a 10+ on Manipulation), or it could just be a deal, no mechanics attached.
This came up in play when a Hardholder wanted to hire the Savvyhead to work on a project, I had him roll because "to do it, do it", but now I'm questioning whether that was really manipulation or not.
There are plenty of situations where leverage is being used to get someone to do something they otherwise wouldn't, and I suspect it's not manipulation, but I can't put my finger on why not. Thoughts?
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: Allison on September 23, 2011, 04:04:13 AM
When the party in question is inclined to just plain accept the offer as it is, you probably don't need to call for a roll to manipulate, unless the offering player wants to do so themselves. When the other party, however, would have reason to stop and consider and maybe counter-offer or decline, then a roll to manipulate may be called for.

Of course, manipulating the savvyhead may have ended up being good for them both--did it? When you manipulate another PC into accepting an offer, you can offer them more than whatever tangible benefit you put on the table--you can also offer them an experience point, which everyone loves. My angel may have manipulated (or, well, seduced, by virtue of "you're cuter when you're alive") our driver into buying herself some armour after she got badly wounded in a firefight, and thus our driver ended up doing something that was good for herself and she got XP out of it.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: Shreyas on September 23, 2011, 10:46:48 AM
For between PCs I think it's the purview of the individual character players to decide whether it's Manipulation or not, like:

Nicodemus: "Hey, I want you to work for me."
Gadget: "Okay, well--"

Then, option 1:
N and G negotiate a deal. No rolls intervene.

Option 2:
N: Hold on, I want to roll Manipulate.
G: Really, dude? Okay.

Option 3:
G: Okay, well, roll Manipulate if you really want it, bc Gadget isn't going for it right now.

Similarly for the PC-NPC case. I think you'll find that nearly all moves in AW can be negotiated this way---

N: Hey, what's actually on Gadget's mind? She's acting weird.

1: G: "There's something I've been wanting to talk to you about, Nicodemus. There's something wrong with our water supply. It tastes like blood, man."

2: G: Roll to read a person, dude, 'cause Gadget isn't talking.

3: N: I'm going to roll to read her.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: noclue on September 23, 2011, 02:43:20 PM
I would say this. If you called for the roll, decide it's manipulation. That may lead you to ask, "Why does the Hardholder need leverage to get the Savvyhead's cooperation on this?" That seems to be a more useful question.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 26, 2011, 07:17:25 PM
Thanks for the replies!

Allison, I think the considerations you suggest for whether a Manipulation roll should be called for seem like good ones, and I found that helpful. But it seems like you are also suggesting the player's may roll Manipulation even when the fiction doesn't call for it in order to generate experience, which I am not sure I agree with. Am I correct about that, or did I misunderstand you?

Sheryas, it seems like you are saying that all moves can be used whenever a player wants. Wouldn't that conflict with the "to do it, do it" rule, which states that a move must exist within the fiction to be rolled, and visa versa? I took the point of that rule to be that it isn't totally up to the player to decide whether a move applies or not, they must take specific actions in the fiction to use a move. Now of course there isn't a clear line between player intent and the fiction, so maybe what you meant was that any given situation can be manipulation or not based on the approach taken, and that is within the control of the player? What I am looking for here are the fictional cues that tell me whether or not a move is applicable, I don't have trouble deciding with most other moves but I'm having a hard time telling what is meant by "manipulation" here.

Noclue, I think that's a good suggestion for how to go forward with that particular situation. But I'd also like to clarify how this move works, going forward into future situations.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: Allison on September 27, 2011, 06:57:59 PM
Thanks for the replies!

Allison, I think the considerations you suggest for whether a Manipulation roll should be called for seem like good ones, and I found that helpful. But it seems like you are also suggesting the player's may roll Manipulation even when the fiction doesn't call for it in order to generate experience, which I am not sure I agree with. Am I correct about that, or did I misunderstand you?

That was me speaking a little loosely. If it seems like a silly situation in order to seduce/manipulate, you can veto it. (Or you can let them do it and punch them in the gut with a hard move if they roll a whoopsie, but what tack you choose is entirely up to what you feel like at the moment.)

Sheryas, it seems like you are saying that all moves can be used whenever a player wants. Wouldn't that conflict with the "to do it, do it" rule, which states that a move must exist within the fiction to be rolled, and visa versa? I took the point of that rule to be that it isn't totally up to the player to decide whether a move applies or not, they must take specific actions in the fiction to use a move. Now of course there isn't a clear line between player intent and the fiction, so maybe what you meant was that any given situation can be manipulation or not based on the approach taken, and that is within the control of the player? What I am looking for here are the fictional cues that tell me whether or not a move is applicable, I don't have trouble deciding with most other moves but I'm having a hard time telling what is meant by "manipulation" here.

Hm. In this case, I think it's as much about who the potentially manipulating player is dealing with as it is about their own actions. Like my example about how if the target would just plain accept, no roll is needed. If a player wants something from an NPC (or, for that matter, another PC; it's the target PC's call, really) and that NPC is kinda "ehh I dunno," you can tell the player that if they want to convince them, that's a seduce or manipulate attempt. (Or they could use Sharp to read them and ask how they could get them to do it, as an example of an alternative.)
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: Shreyas on September 27, 2011, 07:36:44 PM
Sheryas, it seems like you are saying that all moves can be used whenever a player wants. Wouldn't that conflict with the "to do it, do it" rule, which states that a move must exist within the fiction to be rolled, and visa versa? I took the point of that rule to be that it isn't totally up to the player to decide whether a move applies or not, they must take specific actions in the fiction to use a move. Now of course there isn't a clear line between player intent and the fiction, so maybe what you meant was that any given situation can be manipulation or not based on the approach taken, and that is within the control of the player? What I am looking for here are the fictional cues that tell me whether or not a move is applicable, I don't have trouble deciding with most other moves but I'm having a hard time telling what is meant by "manipulation" here.

I'm saying, "honesty demands."

What's happening, procedurally, is that the two characters start out JUST TALKING. At any point, one character can intervene by saying, "Okay, this isn't getting me anywhere, so I will use leverage," or the other character can intervene by saying, "It's clear that this character will not deal unless further leverage is applied." Either way, this indicates that fictionally, negotiations have given way to persuasive pressures of one kind or another, and that (most likely) the characters are aware of this - that's why the effects of a manipulative hit are so punitive and the effects of a miss are "the MC tells you what." There is social violence going on.

I do think that you can manipulate/seduce when your intended victim isn't necessarily putting up a lot of social resistance. However, there's a difference between saying, "Hey Josh can you please do the dishes?" (just talking) and "Josh, if you really loved me you'd do the dishes..." (manipulation) and IMO this difference should be fictionally expressed.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 27, 2011, 08:11:07 PM
I'm saying, "honesty demands."

What's happening, procedurally, is that the two characters start out JUST TALKING. At any point, one character can intervene by saying, "Okay, this isn't getting me anywhere, so I will use leverage," or the other character can intervene by saying, "It's clear that this character will not deal unless further leverage is applied." Either way, this indicates that fictionally, negotiations have given way to persuasive pressures of one kind or another, and that (most likely) the characters are aware of this - that's why the effects of a manipulative hit are so punitive and the effects of a miss are "the MC tells you what." There is social violence going on.

I do think that you can manipulate/seduce when your intended victim isn't necessarily putting up a lot of social resistance. However, there's a difference between saying, "Hey Josh can you please do the dishes?" (just talking) and "Josh, if you really loved me you'd do the dishes..." (manipulation) and IMO this difference should be fictionally expressed.
My impression from your initial explanation was that you could use the move or not without any corresponding change in the fiction, but it's a little clearer from this that you take a player deciding to use the move as signaling intent to use a particular kind of tactics in the fiction.
Do you think someone can use make a manipulation even when the target is inclined to "just plain accept the offer as it is", because they are using manipulative tactics, or do you skip the roll in that case?

Also, "social violence"? Can I take it you think this move is always a violation, then? One of the appeals for me of how AW models persuasion is that, between players at least, it doesn't involve leverage and can use the "carrot" instead of the "stick", so it's possible to play a charismatic character who can persuade others to do what they want without it feeling like violence against the other character. I guess I don't see the results of a hit as always being "punitive", as you put it. Using the move on an NPC it requires leverage, so that seems a little darker, but I just saw it argued that appeals to reason and humanity could also be manipulation. I'm on the fence in the latter case, but I've seen people play this move as something that could go on between friendly characters without anything really evil going on. I'd be interested in hearing another perspective, could you expand on this?
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: Pigeon on September 27, 2011, 08:16:40 PM
Also, "social violence"? Can I take it you think this move is always a violation, then? One of the appeals for me of how AW models persuasion is that, between players at least, it doesn't involve leverage and can use the "carrot" instead of the "stick", so it's possible to play a charismatic character who can persuade others to do what they want without it feeling like violence against the other character. I guess I don't see the results of a hit as always being "punitive", as you put it. Using the move on an NPC it requires leverage, so that seems a little darker, but I just saw it argued that appeals to reason and humanity could also be manipulation. I'm on the fence in the latter case, but I've seen people play this move as something that could go on between friendly characters without anything really evil going on. I'd be interested in hearing another perspective, could you expand on this?

Definitionally, when you use the manipulate or seduce move, you're a) acknowledging a conflict of interest and b) unilaterally attempting to apply pressure to resolve it in your favor. That seems pretty aggressive to me! It's the difference between saying "So what's going on?" and "Okay, I'm reading you. What's really going on?" -- one of them already implies a level of distrust and active penetration of defenses.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 27, 2011, 08:20:18 PM
Wow, that's not how I took reading a person either. I thought that could just represent paying attention to other people and being empathic. Why does trying to observe what someone is feeling, or figure out what they want you to do, necessarily involve distrust or penetration of defenses?
There are a lot of reasons for not just asking someone. Being able to read someone's emotions and desires without asking them is often a sign of emotional closeness, not emnity.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: Shreyas on September 27, 2011, 08:45:33 PM
I wouldn't say "always a violation." I mean, between some people, it's okay to say "if you really love me," but that doesn't make that tactic nonviolent just because it's okay. It's always forceful and aggressive though.

Similarly I feel like, if your characters have the relationship such that they can read each other easily, you can mediate that via one player being like, "Hey Wally, what does Cordon want Suzette to do?" and Wally will either be like, "Order us a round of drinks," or "I dunno, read a person." If Wally agrees that you have the closeness to read each other easily, he won't make you roll.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: bankuei on September 27, 2011, 10:37:28 PM
When to use Manipulation:

"Hey, I want you to do this thing."

a) "Yes, I want to do this thing." No Manipulation
b) "I'm not sure..." "Oh, come on, you SHOULD do this thing because X reason".  Manipulation
c) "No, I don't want to do this thing."  "Oh, come on, you SHOULD do this thing because X reason." Manipulation.

When does it count as leverage?

a) "That actually does matter to me.  Ok, that counts as leverage."
b) "That don't mean shit to me.  That's not leverage."

This may seem really floaty, but it actually says a lot about different characters based on WHAT they do and don't care about, what they can and can't be pushed into, and over what.

Notice that, Going Aggro doesn't have the same kind of judgment factor- avoiding violence is always assumed to be a form of leverage and gets it's own Move because of that.

Chris
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 27, 2011, 11:26:20 PM
@Sheryas
Would you say "I'll let you drive my car if you fix it up for free" could ever count as manipulation? I'd say it could, but it doesn't seem like a forceful or aggressive move to me. I can think of a lot of cases like that where manipulation could be pretty friendly, and calling them "social violence" seems weird to me.
In your reading a person example, what would you say if Wally didn't call for a roll but the MC did, saying Suzette was reading Cordon? Maybe that if Cordon didn't mind being read it wasn't a charged interaction?
It seems to me like misreading of intentions is common even between people who trust each other, and not calling for a roll wouldn't reflect that. But maybe those aren't the kind of misunderstandings that this game is trying to deal with.
Edit: And what if anything would you read into leverage not being a requirement for manipulating a player? Does that mean manipulation is something different in that case, or is there another reason?

@Chris
Thanks for the flowchart, I find that a helpful way to think about this.
Two questions.
If I wanted to use Manipulation could I do so by behaving manipulatively, even if the subject was happy with the original proposal?
Suppose I'm not sure whether something counts as leverage, but it might be. Do you think it's alright to roll, and decide based on the roll? (I guess they were interested on a success, I guess they didn't care on a failure?)
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: bankuei on September 28, 2011, 12:07:52 AM
Quote
If I wanted to use Manipulation could I do so by behaving manipulatively, even if the subject was happy with the original proposal?

Are you, like, not telling them the whole truth?  The key seems to be whether you're going to lean on their full right to consent - withholding valid information counts as that. Which would mean the "original proposal" isn't the whole deal.  Otherwise, you're not really being manipulative, right?

Quote
Suppose I'm not sure whether something counts as leverage, but it might be. Do you think it's alright to roll, and decide based on the roll? (I guess they were interested on a success, I guess they didn't care on a failure?)

If it's being done on NPCs and you're MC'ing, you make the call.  Remember, the NPCs aren't that complicated.

If it's being done on PCs, it's usually pretty easy to tell- either the player goes, "Whatever man, I don't give a fuck about that" and you know it's not leverage, or, they pause and you see their eyes dart for a second as they try to do the calcuation- that's leverage.  If it even comes up as a reasonable possibility, that's leverage.

Chris
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 28, 2011, 12:22:02 AM
I'm trying to get your take on what Sheryas called option 2 up above.
Option 2:
N: Hold on, I want to roll Manipulate.
G: Really, dude? Okay.
If I understand that correctly, the claim is that N can make the situation manipulation through choice of tactics, even if G doesn't think it's appropriate. I'm not sure I agree (it's also possible I misunderstood the example). From your explanation I don't think you'd agree either, but I wanted to check.

With regards to leverage-
With NPCs, when I'm MC, I guess the main time I see it coming up is seduction. Whether or not someone is attracted to someone else is pretty unpredictable, I'm not sure I could always tell, even with uncomplicated NPCs. If I can leave that decision to the dice, that makes things easier on me. Most other forms of leverage are probably easier, though.

With PCs, I don't need leverage so it doesn't come up, right? I make my roll, they get the carrot or the stick, and any leverage I have is just gravy, so it never really needs to be decided "officially" whether something is leverage or not.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: bankuei on September 28, 2011, 12:35:06 AM
With PCs, I don't need leverage so it doesn't come up, right? I make my roll, they get the carrot or the stick, and any leverage I have is just gravy, so it never really needs to be decided "officially" whether something is leverage or not.

I mean, when it's PC vs. PC and you're trying to figure out when to make it a Move or not.

Chris
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 28, 2011, 12:51:49 AM
I mean, when it's PC vs. PC and you're trying to figure out when to make it a Move or not.

Chris
Yeah, I was under the impression that you didn't need leverage when it's PC vs PC, so you don't need that to figure out whether to make a move or not. You use leverage to decide whether to make it a move or not when it's an NPC, I'm not sure what not requiring leverage for PCs would mean other than that you don't need leverage to make the roll.

In the example of two PCs on pg. 198 of the rules, Keeler just wants Bran to like her, and hits a 7 so she can offer him an experience. No mention of any kind of leverage. Maybe it just got left out of the example, but there is a thread somewhere where Vincent clarifies, maybe I can dig that up.

Edit: Found it!
For PCs, you don't need leverage. You get the carrot & stick instead.
This gave me the impression that manipulation with PCs is a whole different beast.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: bankuei on September 28, 2011, 01:06:52 AM
That's what I mean- if the players aren't sure if it's manipulation, you're looking to see if one of them pauses and is considering it, even for a half-beat- if so, call it as time to roll.

Chris
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: noclue on September 28, 2011, 01:14:54 AM
Would you say "I'll let you drive my car if you fix it up for free" could ever count as manipulation?
Here's how that could be a manipulation. You need the car, bad. I want the car fixed, but fixing it is going to be a bitch. You wouldn't take this trade, but I've got you by the short and curlies. "I'll let you drive my car, if you fix it up for free" just became social violence.

If it's just a barter of car for service, it's just a negotiation. It's not manipulative.

In the example of two PCs on pg. 198 of the rules, Keeler just wants Bran to like her, and hits a 7 so she can offer him an experience.

In the fiction, the character is not doing it for the experience point. The character is being manipulated. The player is getting the XP for going along with it.





Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 28, 2011, 01:31:22 AM
Here's how that could be a manipulation. You need the car, bad. I want the car fixed, but fixing it is going to be a bitch. You wouldn't take this trade, but I've got you by the short and curlies. "I'll let you drive my car, if you fix it up for free" just became social violence.

If it's just a barter of car for service, it's just a negotiation. It's not manipulative.
I'm not sure why negotiation can't be a form of manipulation, if it's not clear whether the barter is sufficient or not. I want my car fixed, I know you've always wanted to drive it, so that's leverage. Why do you need to be really desperate? Can't you tempt someone with something they want without doing violence to them?
Is seduction also a form of social violence?

In the example of two PCs on pg. 198 of the rules, Keeler just wants Bran to like her, and hits a 7 so she can offer him an experience.

In the fiction, the character is not doing it for the experience point. The character is being manipulated. The player is getting the XP for going along with it.
Oh yeah, of course the character in the fiction doesn't get experience, experience doesn't exist in the fiction. I was being a little sloppy with my language. But maybe it's worth clarifying what is happening in the fiction. My impression was that Hot characters are persuasive and they can make it appealing to do what they want, you aren't necessarily holding anything over them. Otherwise what does it mean for leverage not to be necessary, right?


That's what I mean- if the players aren't sure if it's manipulation, you're looking to see if one of them pauses and is considering it, even for a half-beat- if so, call it as time to roll.

Chris
Oh, I think I gotcha now. Two PCs are just talking, one mentions something that might be leverage, the other pauses for a moment, so as MC you call for a manipulation roll. But they could also call for the roll, with or without manipulation, right?
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 28, 2011, 02:08:42 AM
The more I think about it, the less well the idea that manipulation is always "social violence" sits with me. Violence entails harm, and the violation of rights. Using leverage can be violent when the leverage is a threat. But offering someone something they want is also leverage. Even when there is a real conflict of interest, such as when you bribe or seduce someone into doing something they wouldn't or shouldn't do otherwise, I wouldn't say you've harmed them. It seems entirely possible that the manipulated party is even better off than they otherwise would have been.

And I'd certainly say negotiation can be a form of manipulation. In most cases it doesn't involve a roll, but that's not because it isn't manipulation, it's because it's completely obvious that the use of leverage is successful. It's like how sometimes you roll for going aggro and sometimes you just inflict harm, or how you need to read a person sometimes but other times it's just obvious what they are thinking. Sometimes you say of course your barter is sufficient leverage to buy this pistol, that's clearly an acceptable deal to both sides so no need to roll. That doesn't mean that situation is fundamentally different from bribing someone to keep silent, it's just that in the latter situation it's much less clear whether the leverage is sufficient, and it needs to be applied with much more finesse.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: noclue on September 28, 2011, 03:02:59 AM
I would say that if you propose something we both agree is in both our interests, that's not manipulation. If you propose something that you feel is obviously in my best interest, but I resist doing it. If you coerce me into doing it, whether through preying on my greed, libido or fear, that's manipulative. Even if you tell yourself we're both clearly better off. Even if we're objectively better off by any metrics that make sense.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 28, 2011, 03:19:04 AM
I would say that if you propose something we both agree is in both our interests, that's not manipulation. If you propose something that you feel is obviously in my best interest, but I resist doing it. If you coerce me into doing it, whether through preying on my greed, libido or fear, that's manipulative. Even if you tell yourself we're both clearly better off. Even if we're objectively better off by any metrics that make sense.
How can you coerce someone with greed or libido? Isn't coercion by definition the use of force or threats? Imagine someone tells you they were coerced into giving up a secret. When you ask how they were coerced, they say they were bribed, they were coerced through their greed. Wouldn't you say them accepting a bribe was totally voluntary, and calling it coercion would be inappropriate?

I think you are referring to the proposal at a different stage of the negotiation here than I was a moment ago. Let's consider the example with fixing the car from earlier.
Offer A: Fix my car for nothing.
As you say, if this offer is acceptable to both parties, there is no need for manipulation. Let's assume it isn't acceptable. I can use the fact that you want to drive my car as leverage, and use that to manipulate you into fixing my car. We can sum this up as a second offer.
Offer B: Fix my car, and I'll let you drive it.
Now, that offer might be so clearly acceptable to both parties that a roll seems unnecessary, if it's just completely obvious that you'd accept that. That doesn't mean manipulation hasn't occurred, it just means we didn't need a roll to resolve it. Suppose it's unclear whether it would work or not, and it would depend upon the finesse with which I made the offer, or brought to the surface your desire for the car. Then it might require a roll. Either way, if I successfully manipulate you into accepting the second offer, that must mean you believe you were better off accepting the offer than not. In other words, I'm not arguing that we were both better off with the first offer, clearly you didn't think so or manipulation would not have been necessary. But we could very well both agree that we are better off with the second offer. On the other hand, I could have taken a totally different approach.
Offer C: Fix my car, and I won't burn your house down.
You'd only take that offer if you thought it was better than not accepting it, but you certainly wouldn't say we both came away ahead on that deal.
I'd describe threats as social violence, but I wouldn't describe rewards that way. Manipulation includes both cases. 

It might be useful to differentiate between the Manipulation move here, and the broader colloquial sense of the word manipulation. It seems like you reject that anything which doesn't isn't manipulation in the colloquial sense could fall under the Manipulation move. Now, we might have a hard time agreeing to the meaning of the word manipulation, but the Manipulation move seems to be defined reasonably clearly in the game text as the use of leverage to get someone to do what you want. I think there are cases where we can use leverage to get someone to do what we want, and thus the Manipulation move applies, but it could be debatable whether it's really manipulation in the usual sense of the word. Just like the Seizing by Force move doesn't always involve seizing anything, and acting under fire is very broadly interpreted and covers cases that you wouldn't call acting under fire outside the game.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: Allison on September 28, 2011, 08:59:06 AM
I would say that if you propose something we both agree is in both our interests, that's not manipulation. If you propose something that you feel is obviously in my best interest, but I resist doing it. If you coerce me into doing it, whether through preying on my greed, libido or fear, that's manipulative. Even if you tell yourself we're both clearly better off. Even if we're objectively better off by any metrics that make sense.
How can you coerce someone with greed or libido? Isn't coercion by definition the use of force or threats? Imagine someone tells you they were coerced into giving up a secret. When you ask how they were coerced, they say they were bribed, they were coerced through their greed. Wouldn't you say them accepting a bribe was totally voluntary, and calling it coercion would be inappropriate?

Oh, I agree that "coercion" would be a funny word to use in such a case. But "manipulation" still works fine. In fact, here we have a fine textbook example of when to roll to manipulate, or to seduce for that matter. You're offering them something they want but still know they shouldn't take, and they're trying to do the thing that's "right" (relative to why they think they shouldn't take the offer) while you're trying to get them to do the thing that feels good.

Now, I don't know about "social violence"--I suppose it depends upon how exactly you define "violence." I might draw the line between social violence and social not-violence based upon, say, whether the two parties involved could still go out for pizza together afterwards, and that standard would suggest that not every usage of seduce or manipulate is social violence. But I suppose it's really up to you.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: lumpley on September 28, 2011, 09:50:57 AM
The wholly nonviolent, noncoercive social move is read a person. "How could I get you to fix up my car?" Then you get to just decide whether you want it enough to do what they want in exchange. No imposition of anybody's will on anybody.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 28, 2011, 01:49:19 PM
What I'm finding a little confusing here is that from reading the book, and from Chris and Allison's answers, I get the impression that all I have to decide to know whether Manipulation is being used is whether the PC has and is using leverage to get something they wouldn't otherwise. That's a judgement call I feel comfortable making.
That would sometimes include negotiation. It's necessarily a conflict of interest over the original issue, but the manipulated party could walk away feeling they were better off if the leverage was a reward rather than a threat.
Noclue seems to be saying that there is more to it than that. But the only difference I can see between my version of the car negotiation and his(hers?) is that his feels... slimier. Now, I can see why you wouldn't want a move called Manipulation to be used in a way that isn't manipulative. But I'd bet if we asked six different people on this forum what the difference between just talking, persuasion, negotiation, and manipulation is, we'd get twelve different answers. Vincent and I may not agree, and I may not agree with the other players. "Does this feel manipulative enough?" isn't a judgement call I want to have to make every time someone wants to use the move.
So does manipulation require something more than leverage? Is it something with a clear dividing line, like leverage, or do I have to gauge whether something feels/seems like manipulation to me?
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: noclue on September 28, 2011, 08:40:58 PM
It's his. I've been searching for a succinct way to state my position and I think it's this. If you're discussing something rationally and appealing to them on the basis of logic and reason, that's a discussion. Maybe it's a move, like Barter. A trade of the use of a car for mechanical service. No manipulation involved. But if you're trying to close a deal by avoiding or overriding their rational faculties and instead appealing to their subconscious, where primal urges like fear and sex and greed reside, that's manipulation.

Is it slimy? I don't know. Is TV advertising slimy?

Do you really need a clear dividing line? I don't think so. If the MC is unsure of their intent they can just ask "are you trying to manipulate her?" and if it still doesn't seem like manipulation, just ask them how.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: ctrail on September 28, 2011, 09:01:25 PM
Do you really need a clear dividing line? I don't think so.
It needs to be pretty clear. If I'm going to make judgements about what does or does not count as manipulation, I at least need a clear definition or test in my head.
But you do actually offer a pretty clear line, which is whether or not emotion and drives are brought into play, instead of just appealing to reason. So I do think one could play it that way and it would work. I'm not totally sure yet that the Manipulation move is meant to be that narrow, I'm not seeing support for this in the rules, but the name of the move somewhat supports that interpretation. It depends on how tight you think the connection is between the names of the moves and what they correspond to in the fiction. I'll mull it over some more.
Title: Re: When to use Manipulate
Post by: lumpley on September 28, 2011, 09:54:56 PM
Look at all the move's possible outcomes. If they're all possible outcomes in the fiction, the move's a fit, and you should feel comfortable using it then. The name of the move is just a reminder.

(Whether you must use the move then is a different calculation, so don't jump to the conclusion that you must.)