We have a Family that may taken on an infectious mutation. I was thinking about representing the stigma attached as a Need: Acceptance. Would that work, or am I missing something?
We have a Family that may taken on an infectious mutation.
We have a Family that may taken on an infectious mutation.
That sounds awesome.
I don’t see why it wouldn’t! The list in the book isn’t meant to be exhaustive, after all. So long as you have a clear idea of how it’s hurting the family, and things they can do to resolve it, then it should be fine.
Make everyone accept infectious mutation or find a way to control it to every Families satisfaction 🙂
It will work for sure… but take in account the Player’s take on the Family. Do they really need to be accepted?
Or… Need: Prestige, Trade, Safety…?
IMHO I think a starting deficit-heavy Treaty ballance is a nice alternative.
Treaty is a positive force to influence other Families, so doesn’t quite deal with a social stigma like a Need would IMO.
Plus I can think of lots of moves that arise from such a Need 🙂
Luke JW if it works for you, great! Go for it!
I just would like to add that Treaties can be more than only positive influence. It can be fear. It can be grudges and guilt. If you owe people your pants in Treaties it means you have no leverage on them and will have to work hard until they hear you.
And even if you have Treaties on them because they fear you, well… let that spice the Fiction on spends.
I meant positive as active, not as in happy 🙂
You could also deal with it using a campaign-wide custom move, like: “when you use subterfuge to divert blame onto a sufferer of the plague, roll with advantage”
Nice. I still think I prefer a Need as it is more transient than a move. However, you could make the trigger of the move reliant on the condition being in place.
Yeah – I’m more thinking of a game where the ongoing presence of this infection and associated social stigma is a big deal, than a thing affecting a particular family.