I posted this at the end of a discussion and didn’t really get any response, I’m assuming because it was a little buried. So, I’m reposting it here, let me know if that’s uncool.
Damn… I thought I had a decent understanding of things, and then I read this part about run away (emphasis mine):
In such a situation, it’s up to MC discretion whether or not you can roll to run away. Instead, the MC might judge that the other party can attempt to lash out physically before you have a chance to run away, thus holding you captive.
Does this mean that lashing out physically can dictate a fictional result? Is this only in this case, against running away? Or just because it makes sense in the fiction? I would understand it if it was just a chance for the aggressor to get a parting shot in, dealing harm as the runner ran, but it’s the “thus holding you captive” part that threw me.
Anybody? Joe Mcdaldno Ralph Mazza Ben Wray
#monsterhearts
Yeah, that makes no sense. It’s never up to anyone’s discretion. If you run away than you roll the move and do so (or not, whatever). Now, somethings might happen in the fiction FIRST. Like I usually ask everyone what they are doing and then we go with what makes sense. If she’s close enough to hit first, then sure. If not then no.
In that case, if they lash out physically FIRST and get it, then they hold them. And then the other rolls to run away.
Short answer: every move MUST dictate a fictional result.
Yeah, that’s what I thought. Joe Mcdaldno, any word? Just something that got missed in editing?
Like, it’s RIGHT and makes sense to me. It’s just not the best way to word it, IMO, for people not used to AW-ish games.
It’s right that you can lash out physically to stop somebody from running away?
Like, you can’t perma hold them. He means grab them and do the harm. THEN they’re like “Okay, I break free and run away”, so then they roll to run away. If they get it, then they break free. If not, they don’t.
Because that doesn’t really jibe with this: “In short: If you want to determine whether Ophelia drags Abrielle into the woods, or Abrielle manages to run away, then that’s run away. Don’t roll lash out physically if you’re trying to control someone or take something, because the move isn’t about that.”
Yeah. I could see it going both ways, depending on how the fictions rolls. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter. Personally, I like the second way, but if an MC went with the other, then cool.
I agree that it looks like it’s contradictory.
Right, it’s not a matter of not being familiar with AW, it doesn’t make sense if you try to reconcile both of those things. I can obviously do things the way that makes sense for me, but I’d like to know Joe’s intent.
Edit: and I’m waiting for his reply e-mail, since he isn’t part of this group.
I saw that, but it goes beyond general *W principals and practices and is pretty MH move specific, which I don’t know as well.
Ralph Mazza: no worries, I just pulled you in here because you’ve been really helpful.
Although…thinking it through…and absent correction from something MH specific…
Could this just be an implementation of Hard Moves. I mean essentially the GM can do pretty much anything he wants to you at any time parceled as a Hard Move…which he can do either on a failed roll, or following set up with a soft move, or if you hand it to him on a silver platter.
So theoretically…if you attempt to run away from a situation that is obviously “WTF, dude…no way you’re running from them…they’re way faster than you” that could easily be the sort of silver platter invitation to Hard Move your ass.
Though that doesn’t say much for the usefulness of that text as an example.
This seems simple enough. The MC is giving you your Run Away and throwing in a hard move. The MC is giving the other character the chance to lash out if you run away.
It’s functionally identical to the Fuck This Shit move from the gunlugger isn’t it? Maybe you got a 7-9 in this fictional scenario (or the fiction precludes the dice) — and the MC gives you your get away buuuuut you can take it if you take your lumps.
Yeah, I don’t know what’s up with that bolded part, either. Like others, I would suggest ignoring it because it doesn’t jibe with my understanding of how “lash out physically” actually works.