w176
Förlorad dotter
Jag har kul och leker med ett system där man köpslår om hur mycket man är villig att fucka upp sin karaktär eller situationen för att vinna en handling eller konflikt.
Vad tycks?
Conflicts
As long as the game flows, let it flow. No matter if it is a physical conflict, two lovers trying to convince each other or someone trying to break into a house. As long as the narrative is interesting and moves forward in a natural give and take, just let it flow.
Rules for mundane conflicts only comes into place when there is disagreement on a how a situation resolve, when players block each other, or things drag on without resolving the scene. They also kick in when people want to use the conflict rules.
For example lets say we have a scene where one character try to prevent anpther character from doing something.
Sigrunns player: “As I stand in front of the altar I don’t turn around as I hear Amira coming into the chamber. I keep my eyes on the dove in the cage and silently recite the incantation.”
Amiras player; “I rush in and throw myself at Sigrunn, grabbing onto her long hair and her right wrist. I scream in rage as I try to jank her away from the altar…”
If play naturally continues in a way that is interesting and works for all players, just flow with that.
But if the players want to use the conflict resolution rules, the players disagree on what happens next or if the scene drags on then the conflict resolution rules come into play.
Conflict clarification
Ask a couple of question to sort out the situation.
1. Ask if this is a conflict. (Sometimes it isn’t even if it seems that way.)
2. Ask different sides goal is
3. Determine the power balance in the scene. Is someone in control of the scene? Does someone have a clear advantage or disadvantage? In general the character is at an advantage should win.
4. Ask if someone wants to yield. If they yield they get to add a small addition to what the other wants to archive “(You drag me away from altar, but I rake my nail across your face”). If someone yields, the story flows on from there.
5. If no one wants to yield then the fucked up- bidding starts.
In the example above the answer might be:
Amira tries to prevent Sigunn from performing a blood sacrifice of a dove at the altar. Sigunn wants to complete the ritual.
Amira is at an advantage, as it is easier to interrupt the ritual than to perform it. Neither wants to yield.
Fucked up bidding
The bidding is about offering the other player or the GM to fuck up your own character or the situation in an interesting way, to win the conflict. Getting hurt, losing control, falling in love with your enemy, letting a secret slip, being humiliated, saying the wrong thing,losing something of importance…. This are all possible ways to fuck thing up. The ways the character or stuation is fucked up should ideally work with the fiction to help explain why they win.
1. Any character is at a disadvantage they first need to make a fucked up-bid to even the odds, otherwise the character at an advantage will win. The more uneven the odds, the more interesting fuck up is needed.
If the other player or GM accepts the bid, then the situation is equal and either side may win the conflict.
2. Either player may then offer a fucked up bid, if the bid is accepted the other side yields. If it is not accepted they can make a counter offer or up the bid.
3. Continue until a bid is accepted by either player or the GM.
Let us continue the example with Amira and Sigrunn.
Sigunn who is at a disadvantage must make the first bid.
Sigrunns player: “When Amira grabs my hair I hack of my hair with the sacrificial knife hacking of my long braid.”. While this is pretty fucked up neither Amiras player or the Gm feels that it is enough to eve the odds.
Sigunns player ups it to: “And while hacking off my hair the knife nicks my own skin and I spill some of my own blood on the knife.” This is fucked up. It both explain why it will be easier for Sigunn to complete the ritual but also increases the risk of her ritual having spilt her own blood, not just the blood of an animal. Amiras player gleefully accepts this bid to even out things.
Then any of them are free to make a bid: “When I felt Sigunns soft hair and skin under my fingers. My heart quickened. I realize that I want her. Badly. Kiss her, hold her, have her. And Sigunn sees that in my eyes as I try to catch her again.” This is nice and juicy fucked up bid. Sidunns player might accept it but wants to try to make a counter offer too.
Sigunns player: “As I try to plunge my knife into the dove, there isn’t just my blood on the knife, Amiras hand was also cut. So her blood too is on the sacrificial knife as I make the sacrifice..”
GM: “Oh. I love that bid. Since it very much involves Amira I want to make sure that you are also onboard with it before I accept?”
Amiras player: “Fuck yeah.”
Then the story resolves from there.
Amiras bid was not accepted but there is nothing preventing them from taking the story in that direction later, or even incorporate that into the scene anyway.
Vad tycks?
Conflicts
As long as the game flows, let it flow. No matter if it is a physical conflict, two lovers trying to convince each other or someone trying to break into a house. As long as the narrative is interesting and moves forward in a natural give and take, just let it flow.
Rules for mundane conflicts only comes into place when there is disagreement on a how a situation resolve, when players block each other, or things drag on without resolving the scene. They also kick in when people want to use the conflict rules.
For example lets say we have a scene where one character try to prevent anpther character from doing something.
Sigrunns player: “As I stand in front of the altar I don’t turn around as I hear Amira coming into the chamber. I keep my eyes on the dove in the cage and silently recite the incantation.”
Amiras player; “I rush in and throw myself at Sigrunn, grabbing onto her long hair and her right wrist. I scream in rage as I try to jank her away from the altar…”
If play naturally continues in a way that is interesting and works for all players, just flow with that.
But if the players want to use the conflict resolution rules, the players disagree on what happens next or if the scene drags on then the conflict resolution rules come into play.
Conflict clarification
Ask a couple of question to sort out the situation.
1. Ask if this is a conflict. (Sometimes it isn’t even if it seems that way.)
2. Ask different sides goal is
3. Determine the power balance in the scene. Is someone in control of the scene? Does someone have a clear advantage or disadvantage? In general the character is at an advantage should win.
4. Ask if someone wants to yield. If they yield they get to add a small addition to what the other wants to archive “(You drag me away from altar, but I rake my nail across your face”). If someone yields, the story flows on from there.
5. If no one wants to yield then the fucked up- bidding starts.
In the example above the answer might be:
Amira tries to prevent Sigunn from performing a blood sacrifice of a dove at the altar. Sigunn wants to complete the ritual.
Amira is at an advantage, as it is easier to interrupt the ritual than to perform it. Neither wants to yield.
Fucked up bidding
The bidding is about offering the other player or the GM to fuck up your own character or the situation in an interesting way, to win the conflict. Getting hurt, losing control, falling in love with your enemy, letting a secret slip, being humiliated, saying the wrong thing,losing something of importance…. This are all possible ways to fuck thing up. The ways the character or stuation is fucked up should ideally work with the fiction to help explain why they win.
1. Any character is at a disadvantage they first need to make a fucked up-bid to even the odds, otherwise the character at an advantage will win. The more uneven the odds, the more interesting fuck up is needed.
If the other player or GM accepts the bid, then the situation is equal and either side may win the conflict.
2. Either player may then offer a fucked up bid, if the bid is accepted the other side yields. If it is not accepted they can make a counter offer or up the bid.
3. Continue until a bid is accepted by either player or the GM.
Let us continue the example with Amira and Sigrunn.
Sigunn who is at a disadvantage must make the first bid.
Sigrunns player: “When Amira grabs my hair I hack of my hair with the sacrificial knife hacking of my long braid.”. While this is pretty fucked up neither Amiras player or the Gm feels that it is enough to eve the odds.
Sigunns player ups it to: “And while hacking off my hair the knife nicks my own skin and I spill some of my own blood on the knife.” This is fucked up. It both explain why it will be easier for Sigunn to complete the ritual but also increases the risk of her ritual having spilt her own blood, not just the blood of an animal. Amiras player gleefully accepts this bid to even out things.
Then any of them are free to make a bid: “When I felt Sigunns soft hair and skin under my fingers. My heart quickened. I realize that I want her. Badly. Kiss her, hold her, have her. And Sigunn sees that in my eyes as I try to catch her again.” This is nice and juicy fucked up bid. Sidunns player might accept it but wants to try to make a counter offer too.
Sigunns player: “As I try to plunge my knife into the dove, there isn’t just my blood on the knife, Amiras hand was also cut. So her blood too is on the sacrificial knife as I make the sacrifice..”
GM: “Oh. I love that bid. Since it very much involves Amira I want to make sure that you are also onboard with it before I accept?”
Amiras player: “Fuck yeah.”
Then the story resolves from there.
Amiras bid was not accepted but there is nothing preventing them from taking the story in that direction later, or even incorporate that into the scene anyway.
