I’ve always found the phrase “Hold 1” and “Spend your hold” a little clumsy.
Here’s two versions of the same move, a pretty basic version of Read a Person. It’s a western game, so I’m experimenting with a different form of language, but I wonder if it is still clunky:
When you size up a person during an intense interaction, roll + Savvy. On a 7-9, Hold 1. On a 10+, Hold 3. On a miss, Hold 1 anyway. You’ll need it.
During the conversation, you can spend one of your Hold to ask a question of the character’s player:
*Are you telling the truth?
*What are you really feeling?
*What do you intend to do?
*What do you wish I would do?
*How could I get you to do ____?
When you size up a person during an intense interaction, roll + Savvy. On a 7-9, collect a Chip On a 10+, collect three. On a miss, collect one anyway. You’ll need it.
During the conversation, you can cash in one of those chips to ask a question of the character’s player:…
What reads better for you?
While “Chip” sounds cooler, it also sounds like a resource you can accumulate, and use for things besides this particular thing.
I like chip better
I agree with Joe that it sounds like it can be held onto. Have you considered just killing the lingo altogether and doing something like:
When you size up a person during an intense interaction, roll + Savvy. On a 7-9, ask one of the following questions of the character’s player during the conversation:
* Are you telling the truth?
* What are you really feeling?
* What do you intend to do?
* What do you wish I would do?
* How could I get you to do __?
On a 10+, you can ask up to three.
On a miss, ask one anyway – you’ll need it.
(Yeah the 7-9/10/6- ordering is whack, but it’s off the cuff. I feel like killing the “hold” lingo can be cleaner though)
For some reason, I read “chip” as something you get to keep and collect more of even after the end of the move. I’m not in love with “hold” either, though.
I’ve always hated the “Hold 1” language, and welcome any attempt to improve it… and frankly, sometimes even a lateral move is an improvement.
(I also hate +1 forward.)
If you can’t keep the chip to use down the road, but have to spend it right then during the conversation…then the chip language is worse. Because it conjures a tangible thing that one would commonly expect to keep. Hold is clumsy, but as a pure term of art, it doesn’t automatically carry additional baggage associated with chips.
If i get to keep my chip and cash it in later…then chip is better.
Maybe this one isn’t the best example, but I think it might work for the gunslinging, where first you get your chips and then cash them in for effect.
Some of the moves it seems to work better:
“Deal with the Devil: Anytime after you roll, you can allow the Marshall (MC) to take 1 Chip to turn a failed roll into a 7-9, or a 7-9 into a 10+. The Marshall can cash in their Chip at any time to make a Hard Move.”
“Survivor Special: When you and another character have sex, they collect a Chip. If they’re in trouble, they can cash in that Chip to have you arrive, no explanation needed.”
Other moves generate the Chips and then spend them immediately/almost immediately.
Are Chips from one move interchangeable with Chips from another? E.g. if I’ve got a Chip from the sex move, can I use it for gunslinging instead of appearing on the scene? Because that seems implied by the fact that they’re the same currency.
For what it’s worth, I’ve taken to always naming hold generated by moves. For example:
Danger Sense: you can always ask the GM “is there is a trap or ambush here?” If the answer is “yes,” roll +INT: on a 10+, hold 3 Deduction; on a 7-9, hold 1 Deduction. Spend 1 Deduction to ask one of the following questions and get an honest answer….
Under Your Skin: When you spend time chatting with an NPC and getting to know them, hold 2 Influence. You can, at any time during the conversation, spend 1 Influence to pick 1…
Itinerant Mystic: at the start of each session or when you go off on your own to do something mysterious, hold 1 Enigma. At any time, your or the GM can spend 1 Enigma to have you appear in the scene, with or without explanation.
Point being: naming the hold gets rid of the “What the heck does hold 3 mean” conversation. Naming the hold something different for each move makes it clear that it’s a currency specific to that move.
If this is a Deadlands hack, then the use of the word chip will definitely get confusing. I’m not a fan of “hold 1” either as its difficult to explain to someone who’s never seen the terminology in a game before.
I like Aaron Griffin’s solution. I don’t mind the mixed order or dice results either!
I’ve found the modification terms clunky as well, and since they are common in most PbtA games, instead of coming up with new terms specific for each game, I just make generic replacements.
Instead of “Hold” I use “Charges”, ex. “If you roll a 10+, you get 3 Charges to use as you see fit in a given seen.” Players seem to understand the concept of Charges more intuitively than the vague semantics of “Holds”.
“+ Forward” becomes “+ Next”, as in just apply it to the next appropriate roll. Straightforward.
I haven’t had any issues with “Ongoing +” anymore, it’s pretty close to the desired language I like to use.
I don’t really like either? What is wrong with “you may ask 3 questions during the interaction”?