Tuesday, August 8, 2017

What happens if this is the only basic move related to violence?

What happens if this is the only basic move related to violence?

When you stand in defense of someone, roll +Hard. On a 10+, choose 3. On a 7-9, just 2:
-- The violence ends, and you prevent anyone else from getting hurt.
-- The violence ends, and you don't get hurt.
-- The violence ends, and you can say what happens next.

18 comments:

  1. There's a lot more running in the game?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Watch?

    I mean, okay, The Wolf has a move that lets them do violence to a person directly, but it's not a basic move and Defend is.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If I don't have any moves to do violence and there is threat of violence then it's time to leave... at high speed.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Huh. This time, that is an unintentional similarity.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ooh, I can beat people up without rolling dice? It will all just be up to fictional positioning? So. Much. More. Violence.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Shucks Tony, sure. But there's no xp and no credits for it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sure there are. Other people get to roll to defend my victims. I'm helping!

    ReplyDelete
  8. More seriously, "there's no move for this" is very different from "this won't be emphasized." There's no move for forcing someone to choose between two allies in Urban Shadows. Having no move can mean something happens less, or way more.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yeah, leaving it to fictional positioning is fine, but a lot will depend on how the GM sees the possibility and consequence of violence in the story.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think I'm with tony, but from a different angle -- as Jesse Burneko pointed out eloquently at one point, if there's no mechanical handle to do something players often try to do, there's a hole in your game.

    If you want something to de-emphasize violence, adding a move may actually help --

    When you rear back to make an attack on someone, roll plus (??)

    On 10+ someone stops you before things get out of hand.

    On 7-9, you seriously hurt your target but pick two

    You're badly hurt too.
    Someone bears a grudge.
    Your situations gets suddenly, sharply worse.


    Now you can do it -- but the consequences largely suck, the "best result" is nothing happens, and so characters are unlikely to make this play.

    ReplyDelete
  11. When you seize by force, take and receive two harm. In addition, roll +Hard. On a 10+, choose 2. On a 7-9, choose 1:
    -- You are not hospitalized.
    -- You are not arrested.
    -- You actually seize it.

    ReplyDelete
  12. When you resort to force, name three goals that your character (consciously or otherwise) intends to achieve. Select two other players at the table. They will each tell you how your character fails at one of those three goals. The MC will tell you how they fail at the third goal.

    ReplyDelete
  13. A move for an AW-inflected game I never finished that seems relevant. You basically play Stasi field officers.

    When you try to hurt someone, it doesn’t work out for anybody. Choose one, some, or all:
    It’s final
    It’s tragic
    It’s strange
    It’s horrific

    I feel like this does a lot to communicate the game's tone and doesn't prevent you from engaging in acts of violence. But it makes it bad and counter-productive, which was my goal.

    ReplyDelete
  14. (Also "choose one, some or all" seems pretty hot! Go, me!)

    ReplyDelete
  15. A move designed to prevent it's own use.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Moves are little packages of causality -- you get a sense of the possible outcomes of doing this particular thing.

    That can clarify how it's good, clarify how it's tricky, or clarify it's bad.

    As Vincent might say, it's part of the conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If you're trying to encourage players to choose nonviolent methods to solve problems, you need to make those methods interesting. Don't just deny them violent moves. Focus the mechanics on talking. Think about moves for flattery, rational argument, emotional appeals, negotiation, bribery, intimidation, deception, haggling, self-deprecation, low humor, comradery.

    If you try to reduce the level of conflict, describe how you did it. You succeed. If you roll 10+, you choose two. If you roll 7-9, first you choose one and then the person you are trying to affect chooses one. If you roll 6-, the person you are trying to affect chooses two.

    -You give up something of value to the other person.
    -You gain something of value from the other person.
    -You lose social standing.
    -You gain social standing.
    -The other person loses social standing.
    -The other person gains social standing.
    -You take harm but don't retaliate.

    If the choices contradict each other (you lose social standing but also gain social standing), then you lose status among some of the people who will find out about this and gain status among others. Because you're so nice, let the other person decide who you will gain and lose status with.

    ReplyDelete