Crabby Moves:
So, I’m a fan of the crabby version of “turn someone on”, because it forces that move to do something in fiction as well as in the mechanics. Whatever happens, once the dice are rolled, the scene is going to shift or end on a 10+.
Now, the “shut someone down” move has a similar problem of not always having its mechanical effect be reflected in the fictional scene, and the crabby version of that move is also obviously trying to address it… but in doing so, it upends the mechanical result of the move (whereas crabby turn on preserved the mechanical result).
Has anyone experimented with a version of shut down that combines a strong fictional result with the condition granting and string loss that was at the mechanical core of the original?
.
.
Can you repost the crabby moves, for reference?
The reason I like Turn Someone On being passive is it allows characters to portray innocence, as opposed to false innocence, which occurs all the time in the related drama. I’d say 90% of “loser with a crush” dramas start with the loser looking at the attractive person, who’s talking to their friends at their locker, >utterly unaware of the underdog’s affection.<
Turn on is: 10+ you gain a string on them and they choose to give themselves to you, give you something they think you want, or leave. 7-9, they choose to give you a string, promise you something they think you want, or gain distracted as a condition. So I think that move preserves the ability of “turn on” to be accidental and passive, as per the original move.
Shut down is: On a hit, they choose to apologize, shut up and take it, or walk away. On a hit, you get a string on them, on a miss, they get a string on you.
So is shut down “on a hit, on a hit” or “on a 10+, on a 7-9?”
whoop, yeah. that second hit/miss should be 10+/7-9
Oh, I remember why I hate the crabby rules. They get rid of the best power of +Cold, which is giving conditions, and throw it at Hot.
I mean how would that even work in fiction?
MC: Lenon Viergo calls you a Homo. What do you do?
PC: I’m gonna roll my eyes and shut him down. “Loser.” 4+5, +1, that’s 10.
MC: Lenon apologizes.
[Everyone stares awkwardly]
Edit: Tim Franzke made some great points here. https://plus.googleapis.com/wm/4/+TimFranzke/posts/4NLQcW85GbF
I mean, the string economy requires the ability to gain and lose social capital by engaging in feral social exchange.
On the old 7-9, you either both get conditions (leaving you both vulnerable to outside forces) or you both lose strings (lowering both of your social powers.) THIS CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE! Strings can be used 1-for-1 to add damage, so if your Fae-ex still holds power over you, him stabbing you with a pitchfork later is enough to go from long-night-at-the-ER to Buried in a Cornfield.
>That< is why being able to get strings out of the economy matters. And whatever moves you dream up should either use strings as economy (which means gain, exchange and depletion) or not use'em.
.