I didn’t really get until we played our first session that there really no mechanic for opposed rolls. Granted, the span of abilities is pretty narrow, but it is definitely unusual to just have a flat difficulty to make stuff happen no matter what. Anyone have thoughts on what the intent was here? Or any issues in play?
I didn’t really get until we played our first session that there really no mechanic for opposed rolls.
I didn’t really get until we played our first session that there really no mechanic for opposed rolls.
Well unless the players said the same thing at the same time, I’d just go with the player who spoke up first unless the second player really wanted to push the issue with reasonable grounds.
Play should just roll on like a conversation punctuated with mechanical interventions at the times dictated by the rules.
There is nothing stopping each player activating the same move on each other or an NPC one after the other with moves snowballing.
I think that’s what Strings are for.
Teenagers hurts each other all the time. But they have little defence against being hurt by others.
In my experience you don’t really need opposed rolls. As Stuart McDermid said, unless two players say they do exactly the same thing at the same time, the fiction will usually dictate who acts first. If not, it’s your job as MC to sort out what happens. Often by asking for player input.
Could you give us an example of what happened in game, David Hoberman ?
I am interested but have nothing to add other haven’t said already.
Sub
You are a wise man, Tim Franzke . I rarely know when to keep my mouth shut. 😉
I’m not the MC at the moment, but I may be at times. Examples of situations where we were fumbling for the best way to run it:
The point about Strings is well taken – we’re all new to the system, and don’t quite have a good handle on how all the different bits interact. I get the sense that Strings should be a bit like Fate points (for those familiar with the game) – constantly being given out and constantly being burned or used for effect. Does that jibe with your experience in play? MCing?
Some examples:
Someone tries to shut down the Ghoul (who has Cold 2) and we’re wondering, “well, she’s the most badass of us all… but that doesn’t do her any good here.”
The werewolf leans against the bathroom door to keep another PC (who is short and not particularly athletic) out. We just said, “yeah, no way she can push the door open without doing something drastic and left it at that.” We would have had the werewolf roll to shut her down otherwise, but again… in this case, agency is on the blocking side, not the person trying to get by (unlike in run away).
It’s not bad (we had a blast)… just different.
Moreno Roncucci , that pithy comment of yours sounds true enough!
Strings are a bit like Fate points, David Hoberman , in the sense that you want to be angling for them most of the time. They are powerful, and not having them can put you at a disadvantage. Especially when the other PCs come after you. Which they will. 😉
It took me a little while as MC to realize that the intent of a player’s action was more important than the action itself. Asking what the player intends really helps me as MC determine which Move should apply, or even if one does.
Like your Werewolf example. What was the player’s intention by holding the bathroom door shut against the other PC? Humiliation? A display of dominance? Then having the Werewolf roll to Shut Down the other PC is probably appropriate.
Does the Werewolf just want to hold the other PC in? Then either the Werewolf or the other PC could roll to Hold Steady. Based on the fiction establishing the other PC as rather weak, I would probably have them roll to Hold Steady. Or even to Run Away. Even though the Werewolf is big and bad, if the dice say the other PC opens the door or gets away, then they do.
I’m not a fan of flat out not letting a player do something, as that takes away player agency. My feeling is that there should always be a chance to spend a String or at least roll to Hold Steady.
I agree with Christian: you should change the focus of the scene, trying to know who wants what and why. The Apocalypse Engine is more about agency, actively pursuing ends.
Also, not everything triggers a move: if the werewolf is just holding the door, and it’s stablished in fiction that he is a big, bad, strong motherfucker, let him do it without a roll. Tell the other player: “You try to get it open, but he is firmly holding it still. What do you do?”
I agree I find it odd in play. It’s as easy for a PC to Turn On the head teacher as it is the never-been-kissed geek in the back row. Equally, it’s as easy for a PC to Hold Steady when facing a fire-breathing monster as it is when being told to come up to the front of the class to read out a homework assignment they never finished.
My solution has been to allow the roll but to have the fictional consequence suit the situation. Yeah, you can turn on the head teacher, but it’s just going to manifest as the slightest waiver in their voice (perhaps not even that), while the never-been-kissed might well try to jump your bones right there.
I’m essentially telling the PC, yeah, have your mechanical effect as written; narratively, though, it’s going to be integrated into the story in a believable way.
Christopher Stone-Bush , the point about strings makes sense – I’m going to try using some next session. The intent in that particular scene was simply to let the Ghoul finish eating a pigeon. If the Ghoul hadn’t acted, I (as the player of the character on the other side of the door) would have probably tried a move.
Igor Toscano that’s pretty much what happened, and then the Ghoul ordered him to move and he did, obviating the need for further rolls.
Richard, you articulated perfectly what I was trying to get at.
Here’s how I look at it. Monsterhearts is not a simulationist game, meaning it doesn’t try to simulate how difficult it is for the characters to do something. All the game cares about is “do you do it?” and “is there a cost to pay or a choice to make?” To that end, the difficulty of an action doesn’t matter nearly as much as what happens next in the story.
Another way to think about it is that the dice rolls only describe how competent a character is, not the effort put into their actions. Turning on the never-been-kissed geek in the back row is probably much easier than turning on the head teacher. Similarly, reading a paper in front of the class is much easier than standing your ground against a fire-breathing monster. What the mechanics don’t tell us though, is how much effort the character expends to accomplish what they set out to do.
Rolling to Hold Steady for being called up to the front of the room to read an unfinished paper might only require a deep breath and you’re good to go. Meanwhile facing down that monster probably requires a heroic amount of self control that possibly nearly breaks you. Turning on that never-been-kissed geek most likely only needs an eyelash bat, or a light graze of the fingers. Turning on the head teacher is a serious test of you seductions skills.
Part of triggering Moves is meeting their fictional requirements. If the player doesn’t, it is within the MC’s power to either ask for more, or not trigger the Move. Casually touching hands with the head teacher as you hand them a paper might not trigger a Turn Someone On Move. Because of who they are you’re going to have to do something bigger. I would use this very sparingly though, as an MC can very easily and unintentionally block player agency. Remember to be a fan of the players.
Finally, the mechanics also almost never dictate a specific response. That is for the MC and the players to determine based on the fiction. Successfully Turning On the head teacher during the middle of class is probably not going to result in them going for you right then and there. Though it might. Again, because of who the NPC is and the current situation, the most that would happen (if I were running this game) is the teacher gives a small visual response and the player gets a String. That’s it. However successfully Turning On the geek behind you would have a much bigger fictional response in addition to getting the String. They probably stutter and stumble, knocking books off their desk and turning bright red when everyone looks over at them. They might follow you out of the classroom awkwardly trying to talk to you, while the head teacher doesn’t even glance your way as you exit.
TLDR: Difficulty and scale of effect in Monsterhearts is largely based on fictional, rather than mechanical elements.
However, if you really want to simulate difficulty mechanically, you can do something Vincent Baker mentions in the back of Apocalypse World. If something’s difficult, you get a -1 to your roll. If something’s crazy difficult, you get -2 to your roll. Vincent notes that many playtest groups asked for this rule, but that all of them dropped within a few sessions as it didn’t add anything to the game other than an unnecessary layer of complexity.