Hello there !
There is a little pb on the move “mix it up” : description doesn’t match mechanic.
p28 : 7+ : you achieve your objective, 7-9 : choose 2 (you make too much noise. advance the revelant mission clock / you take harm as established in the fiction / an ally take harm / something of value breaks).
Then : “If doing something “quietly” is an explicit part of the objective you might succeed in acting quietly (choosing You achieve your objective) but if you do not choose You make little noise you will be discovered after or during the action for some other reason. If doing something quietly is that important to you, choose that option.”
No option “you make little noise”, this was in the beta mechanic.
And finally, p178 : “Kennedy mixes it up with an Ecuadine Petrochem response team. She rolls a 10+ and chooses you are badly hurt. The MC describes how she is shot by one of their EP-45 Assault Rifles (4-harm). Kennedy takes 4 harm and makes the harm move.”
But there is nothing for 10+ in the mechanic.
Is it possible to have an update or an explanation ?
Thanks for those, Yann! I’ll add them to my list for an update.
My pleasure Hamish Cameron I really like your game 🙂
Can you give me a quick answer on how should I use the move ?
If you ignore the confusing example text, is the move itself clear?
If you roll more than a 7, you achieve the objective. If you roll 7-9 there’s a negative consequence or side effect.
(I’ll post a better clarification later as well.)
Perfectly clear ! So if the PC doesn’t want any complication, he must roll a 10+
Maybe you should add something for the “you make too much noise” consequence. Something like “if it’s revelant in the fiction”. I think about situations where it’s already an open gun fight situation where being quiet or not doesn’t matter anymore. Because it’s the PC who choose the complication so… but it’s a minor detail.
By the way, I really like how this move work, it’s really better than the version I read in the beta I had.
Nice job 🙂
That’s the essence of what the example is meant to convey. A gun fight could still be noisy or not depending on whether anyone important to the Mission noticed.
I’m glad the move itself if clear. I’ll fix the example.
New text of p.28: “You can’t tailor your objective so that you avoid the consequences of your choice on a 7-9 result. If doing something quietly is an explicit part of the objective you might succeed, but be discovered after or during the action for some other reason, if you choose you make too much noise. If not being detected is important to you, don’t choose that option.”
New text of p.177: “Kennedy mixes it up with an Ecuadine Petrochem response team. She rolls a 7-9 and chooses you take harm as established by the fiction and an ally takes harm as established by the fiction. The MC describes how both she and Hazer are shot by the response team’s EP-45 Assault Rifles (4-harm). Kennedy and Hazer each take 4 harm and make the harm move.”
(The paragraph referring to the 10+ result is removed)
Hamish Cameron Sounds good for me !
Hopefully that clears up the confusion! Thanks for spotting those!
If I may discuss out of the topic, I would add two things to make the experience even better : a relation map like you can find in Smallville RPG to link all the characters and not just the PCs that could help the MC tickling some strings, and a focus on some locations (like the bar where the PCs spend their time, a store or an office where they (the fixer ?) use to go to get a job or else). Why not using tags for these locations ? Because The Sprawl should be a concreat place in the mind of all the players, and locations seems (to me) really importants in that kind of stories.
Also, I really like the way the matrix is used, but the representation should have been more visual/simpliest. As a network expert in telecomunication in real life, I would keep your exact rules but put it/explain it by using some kind of technical diagram like ones you can create with “microsoft visio”. Something like Deus Ex.
Those are all excellent ideas.
I think the deep recesses of this community contain some network diagrams like that. That’s one of those things that, I totally agree, would be a great way of visualizing things, but that I think the community can do better than me.
I do make a note about using relationship maps in play to keep track of (in particular) the relationships between Threats, Corps, and the characters.
Great !