[Twilight Saga] When you try to win someone's heart...

Quote from: Johnstone on July 25, 2010, 11:50:53 PM

That's a scene-level move.

Disagree.

Winning someone's heart is a result. Trying to win someone's heart is striving for a result. For this to be a move with action-level resolution, it requires you to take action, which is why I added "demonstrate you interest" in my post, btw.

But trying to win someone's heart can be combined with any of the AW basic moves, and be an additional result of that move. You can do pretty much any old thing and say you're doing it to win someone's heart. That result comes at the scene level -- you perform whatever actions, and if you are trying to win a heart, that's what the scene is about.

Same as when you go into battle and you roll+weird in order to say one person who lives and one person who dies. That's scene-level resolution.

When do you roll+sway to win someone's heart? Anytime you're doing something to win their heart? I can rack up 9 strings in one scene. Do you roll at the beginning of the scene and hold those strings for the scene? Do you roll at the end of the scene, to determine whether or not you are successful?

And if you can only roll once per scene or situation, then absolutely it's scene-level, because the whole scene revolves around that roll. What is more important than winning somebody's heart? Nuffin.

Hey, I know we're all having some fun at Twilite's expense, but seriously, the idea of a game about how close teenagers are to monstrous, and how emotions spill us into monstrous behavior, and how attractive teenagers are to allllllll kinds of stuff, and every.damn.thing.you.think.or.say at age 16 is fraught with double entendres, that's pretty rich.

Oh, for sure.  I think I've been more vocal than anyone else in this thread about hating Twilight, but there's a reason I'm following it, and that's because, yeah, while there's no way in hell I'm going to go buy a boxed set of the Twilight Saga, I think this hack sounds rockin'.  Or at least it's got some super-rockin' ideas running through it.

I also think I agree with Meg's first point.  If part of the idea is exploring the metaphor of teenagers=monsters, than PCs probably shouldn't be mortals.  Plus, if it's mostly monsters falling in love with and fucking (in both the literal and metaphorical senses) with mortals, ensuring that PCs aren't mortals keeps PCs from being aimed directly at each other.  Which is probably a good thing?

I think there's a special move that lets you take strings against someone instead of wounding them, when you Seize By Force.

This move is called Edward, right?

This move is called Edward, right?

Honestly, Edward doesn't Seize By Force often.
Edward denies people what they want, and makes promises he has no intention of keeping.

Abstaining Vampire.
For Edward, it's all about "Gain 1 String when you deny someone sexually."

The first contains your [regular] moves. The second contains your sex move. Sex moves are probably not "when you have sex", but "when you do this particular sexual thing", like abstaining or tempting or taking or throwing yourself at someone.

I'm curious about this. So if I play a Fairy-type who is Abstaining sexually, then I get a PC with a different feel than if I play a Troll-type who is Abstaining. Or Werewolf Playful. Hmmm. Yeah, I can see it, but I'd want it to be about my sexuality in general, not just "when I do this particular sexual thing", unless you can explain your ideas there a bit more?

I'm thinking that for Monsterhearts, the sex moves are about sexual behavior, rather than straight-up sex.

Abstaining would have "Gain 1 String whenever you deny someone sexually."
That would include pushing away when they try to kiss you, and saying, "No... I can't. I'll get too hungry. I'd put you in danger."

Vicious might have "Whenever you use Seize By Force or Threaten (Go Aggro) to meet your sexual needs, mark an experience."
Or something. I haven't figured out the specifics yet.

I also think I agree with Meg's first point.  If part of the idea is exploring the metaphor of teenagers=monsters, than PCs probably shouldn't be mortals.  Plus, if it's mostly monsters falling in love with and fucking (in both the literal and metaphorical senses) with mortals, ensuring that PCs aren't mortals keeps PCs from being aimed directly at each other.  Which is probably a good thing?

Part of the brilliance of having a single person able to play a mortal is that you have a single person who's screaming "I'm a victim! Pick me! Pick me!"

What can Bella do? She can feel anguish, and she can love unconditionally despite bearing witness to monstrosity. That she isn't herself a monster adds something sad and wonderful to her situation.

The nothing-special mortal is a staple in the genre. It's a brilliant counterpoint character, and it creates amazingly unparallel power dynamics, which is exactly what this game needs.

And yes, the game SHOULD steer PCs into direct opposition and have them sleeping with one another and fighting with one another over the same guy, or girl. The more inter-PC drama, the better. Also, the less time is spent with a single player and the MC interacting.

Can we agree that Twilight and Buffy are polar opposites? Yeah? Okay, then I'm in, too.

Can we agree that Twilight and Buffy are in the same genre?
That genre being supernatural teen sex drama.

How are they so polar and opposite?
I mean, Buffy has agency and friends and purpose.
Bella is a puppet for expressing dysfunctional longing.
Is that how?

Otherwise, they have a lot of the same things going on, including friends who don't understand, sexually abstaining vampire boyfriends, emotionally unstable vampire boyfriends, and spooky monster cameos.

I don't disagree, but I do want to know what exactly you mean.

There's a dedicated forum for Monsterhearts. Let's migrate there.

Want me to move this thread?

-Vincent

And yes, the game SHOULD steer PCs into direct opposition and have them sleeping with one another and fighting with one another over the same guy, or girl. The more inter-PC drama, the better. Also, the less time is spent with a single player and the MC interacting.

Well, sure, I agree that two PCs fighting over the same guy or girl would be great, I'm just questioning whether you want two PCs fighting over another PC.  But if you think that's needed here, then go for it.  I bow to your superior experience with both the genre and game design.

Abstaining Vampire.
For Edward, it's all about "Gain 1 String when you deny someone sexually."

I dunno man, sounds like bullshit to me. If he's the only one driving the abstinence, why hasn't she fucked the werewolf dude? I think the dudes get to mark experience when she wants them, so they can defeat the other vampires etc, but they've seen Buffy so they know what happens if they go all the way.

Also, you're probably right that it might be better to get some feedback on your mechanics from somebody who actually knows anything at all about the source material, or has seen a full episode of Buffy at the every least, but it seems they just want to tell you to stop watching Twilight.

Take it to the Monsterhearts forum!

I'm locking the thread meanwhile, just to boot you guys over there.

-Vincent