A question about the 2nd Edition seduce/manipulate move:
I notice that the new text for the seduce/manipulate move includes “bluff, fast-talk, or lie”, which, according to my understanding, was outside the scope of the 1st edition version (or, at least, that’s how we played it).
The description of the move, however, still explains that you use this move when you put pressure on someone by virtue of leverage you have over them.
For instance, you can seduce someone (using sex as your leverage) in order to get them to agree to do you a favour, or you can threaten someone (using violence as leverage) to do something; of course, it also works for a straight-up negotiation, where something is on offer and you want something in exchange (“I’ll bring you a tanker full of gas, if you hand over the prisoners now”).
Knowing what the leverage is important, because it explains what kind of promise or assurance the NPC might need.
However, if the PC is “bluffing, fast-talking, or lying”, what is the leverage in play?
How do you expand the scope of the move to such actions?
I’m a little lost, and the clarifying text in the book seems to be more-or-less the same as it was in 1st Edition.
📌
“Look, bub, I’m gonna level with you, ‘k? See that guy over there with the spiked collar? No, no, the other one, with the rusty goggles. Yeah, him. That’s Balls, and Balls is waiting for a signal from me. If I don’t give him that signal, he’s flip that table, whip out a belt-fed nail gun and start some impromptu renovations, know wadda mean? So how’s about you remove that knife from the inside of my thigh and put it on the table, and I signal Balls, and we talk about this like civilized hooligans?”
I.e. bluff, fast talk, or lie means your leverage does not have to be real, just convincing. Though good luck providing that concrete assurance/proof/collaboration on a 7-9.
Jeremy Strandberg’s answer stands on its own and is great, but I also have to say: It feels like the move is teaching you how to roleplay someone being persuasive. Like, in order to get what you want from someone who doesn’t want to give it to you, whether you’re lying or telling the truth, you’ve got to offer them something they want too.
I actually really appreciate this level of player instruction, considering how many games I’ve played over the years in which PCs basically say “give this to me because I want it,” and expect a persuasion roll to fill in the gaps. No, to do it, you’ve got to do it. I want to see what you’re willing to give up in order to get what you want, whether the answer is “information,” “money,” “self worth,” “honor,” or whatever. You don’t just roll a die and magically get what you want. These characters have to somehow make it happen.
Yeah, I like that interpretation of it: the danger of a 7-9 being practically a failure makes it less appealing.
How do you decide when it is triggered, though, in that case? Some characters “lie” a lot, for instance – it seems like that would come up very often, and not always in fruitful ways.
There’s lying because you don’t want someone to know the truth (probably Act Under Fire, the fire being suspicion or them just calling you on your bullshit, or whatever danger you were lying to avoid).
And then there’s lying about having leverage in order to get someone to do what you want. That’s Seduce/Manipulate.
Good answer. I think that, while most/many lies don’t need a move at all, selective application of “act under fire” (when a lie is dangerous or in a tense situation) and “seduce/manipulate” (for when you’re trying to get someone to do something you want) should handle them quite well. Added to my bag of “how to use AW’s moves”! Thanks.