2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)

  • 174 Replies
  • 69940 Views
*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #135 on: March 19, 2017, 11:50:58 AM »
A bit of housekeeping: the first time on this forum that I told somebody to have both players roll and apply both of their choices to a single exchange of harm was here, in June of 2010, before I'd even published. It didn't become the formal rule until 2nd Ed, but it was always the approach that I recommended.

Okay! Here's the corrected sum uppage for Gremlin vs the gang's blockade. In an unmodified exchange of harm:
  • The gang hits her pickup for 3-harm (serious damage, more than one impaired function, can be field-patched). Blow-through hits her for 1-harm.
  • Her pickup hits the gang for 2-harm (some serious injuries, a couple of fatalities), which we'll take to be her driving her truck right the hell over this guy with the machine gun, and probably he has a friend in there too.

Now I'm going to lay out her choices. She gets to choose 1, 2, or 3 of these, depending on her roll.
  • If she chooses to inflict terrible harm, she'll be swerving to drive along the line of the blockade, hitting as many people as she can. She'll inflict 3-harm: widespread injuries, several serious, a few fatalities.
  • If she chooses to suffer little harm, she'll be swerving to avoid the worst enemy fire. Her pickup will suffer 2-harm (one impaired function, can be field patched). Blow-through will hit her for 0-harm.
  • If she chooses to force her way through her enemy's position, she'll be on the other side of their blockade. If she doesn't, she'll be hung up on it somewhere.
  • If she chooses to impress, frighten or dismay them, she probably won't frighten or dismay them, so let's go with impress. They'll admire her fearlessness, recklessness, and unflinching assault, and as MC our job is to change their behavior accordingly.

Before she rolls, she's surely looking at these options and beginning to weigh them out. What do you all think she's thinking? If you were her, how would you be prioritizing them? What roll are you hoping for?

And the MC needs to be thinking about the possible state of her pickup and the possible reactions of the gang, too. The pickup might wind up taking 2-harm or 3-harm; if you were the MC, what would you be thinking about the difference there? How out-for-blood do you think the gang should be? Where do you think the gang's 4-wheeler outriders should be, that you told Gremlin to be on the lookout for, back when she read the situation?

-Vincent

*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #136 on: March 19, 2017, 12:19:18 PM »
Oh, and I forgot the most important question for our current purposes!

Which option or combination of options do you think will resolve the situation, and which do you think will leave the situation unresolved?

-Vincent

*

Ebok

  • 415
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #137 on: March 19, 2017, 12:51:07 PM »
This is Paul T's show, but I figured I'd toss out my immediate feelings on the matter:

The priority depends a lot on the fiction (who are these guys, why does she need through?), so taking this example in isolation is already one level of abstraction out. There are many different approaches to this, here are two:

Either way the first choice is Seize Definite Hold: She wants to get through first and foremost. Not choosing this means she's still actively engaged with the gang and can expect another round of violence at the very least... worst case senario. Choosing this puts most the gang behind her, except for the 4-wheelers whose behavior differs substantially depending on:

1.)
Inflict More Harm (7+) ~> Suffer Less Harm (10+)
Inflicting more harm might scatter the gang if they don't have good leadership preventing them from aggressively chasing her down, but will also invoke the worst of the gang's revenge later. Suffer less will mean less time lost repairing the vehicle after getting through, since she's likely to be pursued by some hateful fuckers. The 4-wheelers in this case are probably on the edges of her vision, tracking her, so the gang knows where to find her when they recover. If she's stuck due to damage, she might have them coming up on her later but while she's still isolated (not great). Either way, she might have to follow these rolls with another to lose them.

We could swap the 10+ option for Impress, which would certainly buy her more time and delay the aggression, but at the cost of the vehicle's functionality.

2.)
Impress (7+) ~> Suffer Less Harm (10+)
Her showing moxy might have those gang members going "god damn!" and that marvel is going to eat away at their aggression. I mean, watching some of your pals get run over isn't great, but how many times in one's life are you going to see someone break the lines like That!. So assuming these people aren't going to be overly interested in hunting her down and killing off such a skill, next best thing is to have less to do with repairs. This is probably the best combo for keeping the battle ended here. As for the 4-wheelers, they might also follow her movements, but in this case it's more like to just have the info if they need to sell it off later. Of course, if she's going far, then screw that, maybe they watch her go.

Miss
Of course on a miss, she's got an unimpressed gang still coming after her, not damaged enough to scatter, and her vehicle cant take much more of this. So she'll be racing away from them but probably immediately engaged with the four wheelers and under whatever fire can be leveled on her from the enemy lines. It's entirely possible they'll successfully run her down in her broke ass vehicle which cannot take another hit of any kind.

Damage
As an MC, for the 2-harm, I'd be looking at the vehicle tags when deciding damage. Rugged, Off-road, Powerful, Picky Id start by saying she's probably got a tire blown out, slowing down the vehicle, but not stopping the rugged beast. Probably do some cosmetic damage as well, bullet holes, busted glass, a missing mirror, etc.
For the 3-harm, I think I'd ask my players to tell me what else is wrong with it, making sure they impair the vehicle. If they resist, I'll have some smoke coming out of the engine, maybe it sucked one of the gang members up into the grill and the meat's causing the beast to be more Picky then normal, in need of a serious clean, and risking full on fire if it doesn't get addressed. ( not to mention others seeing the blood and body parts smashed into the front of a bullet laden truck as a first impression )

That's my 2-cents.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2017, 01:06:26 PM by Ebok »

*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #138 on: March 19, 2017, 06:56:28 PM »
Cool. If it were 1st Ed, what MC moves would you be considering for a miss?

-Vincent

*

Ebok

  • 415
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #139 on: March 19, 2017, 09:26:27 PM »
I'd possibly have the picky truck acting up first, possibly causing the engine to die in the middle of gunning it so when it would've been smashing through, instead contact with something tips the truck, throwing the driver into the mess of things. They (the gang) probably wouldnt immediately know what was happening due to the chaos, therefore the player doesnt has any other immediate threat, but clearly the character is in a jam. They might have stuff in the truck they need, they might need to escape, they might need to steal a 4-wheeler, dunno. Any harm that he wouldve suffered from the exchange of harm I'd re-categorize as scrapes from the crash.

Mind you without context of the terrain, the gang, the other snowballs, it's hard to say definitely what a miss would've been. In that case the truck itself would still crush or hit the members of the gang to deal the harm.

::Edit:: This being a driver though, I would probably resist the urge to seperate her from the truck, in which case I'd consider letting gang members board it instead, possibly forcing the truck off course and into (undesirably) perilous terrain. Now she's barreling down say some pretty rough terrain, with fuckers gripping tight to things held to the bed of the truck. Looks like they're going to start unloading lead soon as they can risk letting go. Course the truck is still damaged, and all that it still described, though I might reattribute some of the cosmetic damage to the new terrain threat.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2017, 09:42:14 PM by Ebok »

*

Munin

  • 417
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #140 on: March 19, 2017, 09:41:15 PM »
In 1st Ed, I'd be considering putting someone in a spot, or capturing someone, or flipping her move depending on the fictional situation. Is someone riding shotgun? If so, for sure that person was thrown from the vehicle during all of the maneuvering. A miss is not success, so Gremlin's definitely not through the blockade; so in this context "capturing someone" might be less a case of "they haul you out of the vehicle and clap you in irons," but more like, "Oh, shit! One of them has an RPG! You swerve like a mad-woman and cut hard-right to keep him from getting off a shot, but that takes you straight into a little box canyon just short of the barricade. You're still driving, but there's almost no room to maneuver in here." Flipping the move feels the least interesting to me in this context. I might also consider taking away their stuff; "Yeah, fuck, this barricade is more strongly manned than you thought. You're not getting through. You pull a nice pirouette and motor away, but the barrels of water in the back of the pickup break loose and tumble out in the process. Dremmer's going to be pissed when he finds out you lost the water." Then, whether or not the gang pursues Gremlin might depend on how much they start fighting with each other over possession of the water barrels.

EDIT: like Ebok, I would resist separating the Driver from her vehicle, which is why "capturing someone" looks the way it does with the box canyon. This snowballs immediately into more violent trouble, for sure.

*

Ebok

  • 415
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #141 on: March 19, 2017, 09:44:52 PM »
Definitely the presence of other things in and on the truck would provide a litany of other ways to hit back for the missed roll.In my response I pretty much assumed an empty truck with just the driver in it. This would also be a good time to introduce the threat of the 4-wheelers as a visible and on scene menace.

Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #142 on: March 20, 2017, 05:52:04 PM »
Vincent, just a minor technical question: the 1-harm blow through (instead of the possible 2-harm) is because of Gremlins armor from Daredevil, yes?

*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #143 on: March 20, 2017, 06:08:58 PM »
Yep!

-Vincent

*

Ebok

  • 415
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #144 on: March 21, 2017, 01:27:13 AM »
So lumpley, what is so much better about the 2e results rather then 1e results? I mean, the biggest difference is shit got really intense for the runner on a miss, since they didn't get to leverage their advantages and were denied egress. Whereas in 2e, they gained egress regardless of the roll, so the roll had no impact on whether or not this occurred, only the stakes after the success. This is in stark contrast to say, they tried to breach the lines by acting under fire, where the 7-9 results would be closer to the 2e seize by force miss, and the miss is abject failure.

I guess the bigger concern I still have is it was actually impossible to deny the player what they wanted in 2e. They could not fail in pushing through, not really. How would you handle a situation where a character should be fictionally unlikely to succeed, yet has that guarantee through the move? There doesn't appear to be anything besides certain death that could stop an objective from being hit, is that on purpose? And if so why?

Also, you've said we're still able to follow up with MC moves just like before, however, "turn their move back on them" isn't a move you can use if the succeed. In fact, without the permission to make a move as hard as we like in response, I'm not sure that turning the move back on them is even fair play by the rules of 2e. What are you thoughts?

I'm curious what we gain that we didnt have before.

*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #145 on: March 21, 2017, 08:50:20 AM »
Ebok, the purpose of the change is to create more space in play for the other battle moves. That's what we gain.

With this example I'm trying to show how it does that, because that's Paul's question, but I think you've already got it: in 1st Ed, if she misses the roll, you can end the battle there, and often should. In 2nd Ed, her miss signals that the battle's still on. She's achieved her most immediate goal (or chosen to abandon it), but she's paid for it in harm, the landscape of the battle has changed, and the matter is still under contest. It's the second or third move that ends the battle.

As far as her guaranteed success goes, notice that the cost she's paid in harm raises the stakes and means that for the second or third move, she can lose the battle even if she doesn't roll a miss on the move. In our example, she simply can't afford any more harm to her pickup, so she's going to have to choose her engagement with the 4-wheelers very carefully.

Hitting the first move with a 10+ means that you go into the second move with momentum and initiative. Missing the first move means that you go into the second move with lost ground to somehow make up.

-Vincent
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 09:01:21 AM by lumpley »

*

Munin

  • 417
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #146 on: March 21, 2017, 11:19:31 AM »
That was a very simple, clear, and succinct statement of the intent behind the change. Thanks for clarifying your thought process!

What I think is interesting is that there's almost an implicit hard move on the part of the MC in the 2nd Ed example, and that's that even if you pick to 'take definite hold' and make it through the blockade, you're still considered to be "in battle" and at significant risk (i.e. snowballing into further battle moves) - which is functionally identical to putting someone in a spot.

In some sense, the main substantive difference between editions in this example is on which side of the blockade the further (snowballing) action is taking place. But in terms of player agency and being a fan of the characters, I like the fact that resorting to mutual, dedicated, single-minded violence gives you the opportunity to mortgage your future to get what you want right now.

That said, the NTBFW Gunlugger kitted out in heavy armor and toting an MG is a thing (and not even all that rare a thing), and its ability to take particular advantage of this change should not be hand-waved away.

*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #147 on: March 21, 2017, 12:23:00 PM »
Write out the numbers on that dude! It's a good example for him too. How's he looking, going into the second battle move, compared to Gremlin?

-Vincent

*

Munin

  • 417
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #148 on: March 21, 2017, 02:10:14 PM »
Sure. Let's keep things simple and stick with the same gang: 3-harm, medium, well-disciplined, 1-armor - want: savagery - about 40 rough customers, with varied and extensive weapons, and they're disciplined but barely holding on to that discipline.

Clutch, the Gunlugger: Cool+1 Hard+2 Hot-2 Sharp+2 Weird-1
Gear: machinegun (3-harm close/far area messy), heavy armor (2-armor)
Moves: NOT TO BE FUCKED WITH, Bloodcrazed

We'll keep the truck the same, too; what Gunlugger doesn't love a good off-road pick-up?
Vehicle: Pickup (massive=2, speed=0, handling+1, 1-armor) Rugged, Off-road, Powerful, Picky

So the gang's blockading Clutch's way through a broken, rocky, blown-dust and gully landscape called the Knives. He's already read the situation and he knows his best way through: there's a spot overlooking the road where there's a guy with a machine gun, set up to catch coming vehicles in a crossfire, but Clutch is going to use his vehicle as a weapon and drive right through this little machinegun nest. Clutch also knows that he should be on the lookout for the gang's 4-wheeling outriders, on both sides of the blockade, but he hasn't seen any of them yet.

Here are the harm calculations:

The gang's inflicting 3-harm, +1harm for their size, for a total of 4-harm. They've got 1-armor, +1armor for their size differential, and hell, let's give them +1armor for defending a prepared position for a total of 3-armor.

Clutch is using his vehicle as a weapon. A direct hit inflicts 3-harm, +2harm for its massive, +1 for the fact that Clutch is Bloodcrazed for a total of 6-harm. A glancing hit inflicts 3-harm.

His pickup has 1-armor.

In sum, in an unmodified exchange of harm:
The gang hits Clutch's pickup for 3-harm (serious damage, impaired function, can be field-patched). Blow-through hits Clutch for 2-harm, but his armor reduces that to 0.

Clutch's pickup hits the gang for 3-harm (widespread injuries, many serious, several fatalities), probably royally fucking up that one guy's machine gun nest and running over a few other random assholes in the process of blowing through the barrier.

So here are Clutch's options; he gets to choose 1, 2, or 3 of these, depending on his roll (which, being Hard+2 and taking +1 forward from reading the sitch is highly likely to succeed):
  • If he chooses to inflict terrible harm, he'll be swerving to drive along the line of the blockade, hitting as many people as he can. He'll inflict 4-harm: widespread serious injuries, many fatalities.
  • If he chooses to suffer little harm, he'll be swerving to avoid the worst enemy fire. His pickup will suffer 2-harm (one impaired function, can be field patched). Blow-through will hit him for 1-harm, which his armor will reduce to 0-harm.
  • If he chooses to force his way through his enemy's position, he'll be on the other side of their blockade. If he doesn't, he'll be hung up on it somewhere.
  • If he chooses to impress, frighten or dismay them, I'ma go with frighten them; the screams of dudes with crushed legs and broken spines can be heard over the roar of Clutch's engine as he does donuts over the gang's prepared positions - as MC our job is to change their behavior accordingly, which might just mean bugging the fuck out.

Even in the unlikely event of a miss, Clutch still gets to pick one. I think much of his choice will depend on how attached he is to his truck, but he certainly has the option of blowing through the blockade and taking his chances with the 4-wheelers who (since they are not impressed, dismayed, or frightened) are probably out for blood. Although if the gang's leader is weak or absent, he might be better off choosing to inflict terrible harm and cause them to break. If "the gang" breaks, does that include their pack of 4-wheelers? I'd say probably so (as it's not a separate entity), which effectively cedes the field to him and ends the conflict. This would essentially be a win on a miss, which is I think what people were originally most concerned about. All that it has cost Clutch is some harm to his vehicle.

And honestly, if Clutch were attached to his truck, he's better off leaving it somewhere (relatively) safe and hoofing it to attack the blockade on foot. Sure, he'll have one less point of armor and do one less point of Harm with his base attack (he loses the +2 massive but gains the area tag, which I'd say probably offsets the bonus to the gang's +1armor for size difference, at least initially). In this case, Clutch is exchanging 2-harm for 2-harm before making any choices.

For the miss case, let's say he plays it conservatively and chooses to suffer little harm - now he's exchanging harm at a 2-for-1 rate. This initially doesn't look so bad going into a follow-up battle move, but the key here is going to be what the MC does to snowball into that move. At the very least, I'd likely describe the gangers fanning out, trying to get Clutch into some kind of crossfire, maybe with a couple of the 4-wheelers making a flanking maneuver (i.e. make it clear to Clutch that he won't get the benefit of his weapon's area tag anymore). And/or maybe say that he sees a couple of 4-wheelers peeling off and heading to where he parked his truck - shit, they must have spotted it even under the camouflage netting! This presents him with the choice of whether he wants to do dedicated violence to the guys in the immediate vicinity, or concentrate on the guys going for his truck (I'd let him lay down fire to suppress the 4-wheelers making a break for his truck, forcing them to duck for cover or break off for a tick).

Is this more or less what you had in mind when designing the 2nd Ed moves?

« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 02:19:18 PM by Munin »

*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: 2nd Edition and Seize by Force (and similar moves)
« Reply #149 on: March 21, 2017, 04:18:21 PM »
It's pretty much exactly what I had in mind when I designed NOT TO BE FUCKED WITH, so, yes.

I think it's important to say that he was just as unlikely to roll a miss by the 1st Ed rules. The badass gunlugger is the character LEAST affected by the change in the move.

-Vincent
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 04:31:00 PM by lumpley »