I’m thinking more and more of moves as rulings, and feeling more freedom to write custom moves as the situation…

I’m thinking more and more of moves as rulings, and feeling more freedom to write custom moves as the situation…

I’m thinking more and more of moves as rulings, and feeling more freedom to write custom moves as the situation demands – usually to satisfy one of the game’s principles, when an existing move feels inadequate. This includes coming up with moves as a player, and suggesting them to the GM.

For example, my PC has technology that can “remix” existing human memories, and this is how he produced his AI friends. It’s not a general-purpose memory editor, it only facilitates the creation or repair of living minds on their own terms. Another PC, and his NPC love interest, both shared plenty of experiences, but had also lost memories or emotional contexts. So we put this tech to use fixing that. Rather than Unleash Your Powers, I wanted a move that put control over those characters’ fates in their hands, and gave them as much authority as they could. The resulting suggestion to the GM (and adopted as written, and used successfully) was this:

When your memories are remixed with someone else’s via Newman neurotech, roll +Conditions. On a hit, the resulting connectome (a map of how a brain is wired) is stable, and the merge goes forward. On 10+, pick three side effects. On 7-9, pick one.

1. An important existing memory takes on a new form, or you get a new perspective on it

2. You get memories the other person would prefer you don’t get

3. You gain one of their goals or plans; if it’s something you wouldn’t have done before, mark potential if you do it

4. Your ego is in flux; the GM shifts your labels

5. Their relationships bleed into yours; give Influence to the other person, or to someone they give Influence to

On a miss, choose one: the connectome isn’t viable and the merge can’t take place and you must try again after time passes, or the merge succeeds but your ego is wildly in flux – the GM will rearrange your labels as they see fit and you take a powerful blow.

Is there some errata for the beacon somewhere?

Is there some errata for the beacon somewhere?

Is there some errata for the beacon somewhere? The move “no powers and not nearly enough training” lets you fill the blank with some tech you picked up if it’s empty, but there is no way to clear it out. And you only get the benefit the first time you use it. My guess would be you can ditch the item after you used it and pick up a new item.

What are the limits of the “take something from them” option in Directly Engage a Threat?

What are the limits of the “take something from them” option in Directly Engage a Threat?

What are the limits of the “take something from them” option in Directly Engage a Threat?

When my players use the Directly Engage move, on a hit, they have a habit of coming up with stuff like “I want to take something from them. Can I take their vitality? What about their sight? Can I take their secrets? Or their will to fight? Or their powers?”

I’ve been nixing anything that would end the fight before the villain’s conditions are all checked, but I’m not sure how far to let them stretch the definition of that option. (At least one player has vitality draining powers and psychic abilities, so some of these requests are somewhat reasonable.)

So clearly, “I want to take their sight” is actually “temporarily blind them” which is basically “create an opportunity”, or maybe “impress, surprise, or frighten”.

Is “take information/take a secret” a reasonable use of the option?

If they try something like, “take their self confidence”, could I let them pick which of the villain’s condition get’s marked? (Insecure, in that case).

What if the villain doesn’t have anything worth taking (and i can’t invent something off the top of my head)? Do I just say “there’s nothing here to take, choose another option).

(I love my players, I love how creative they are, and that’s why they drive me crazy. 🙂 )

I think Black Lightning (the CW show) is great inspiration for a Masks game—specifically examples of label influence.

I think Black Lightning (the CW show) is great inspiration for a Masks game—specifically examples of label influence.

I think Black Lightning (the CW show) is great inspiration for a Masks game—specifically examples of label influence. Lynn and Gambi and Henderson trying to shift Jefferson’s labels between mundane, savior, and danger. Then Lynn and Jefferson doing the same to Anissa. Obviously the characters are out of the scope of a Masks game, but the scenes are great examples of influence moves.

Hello Masks enthusiasts!

Hello Masks enthusiasts!

Hello Masks enthusiasts!

I’ve been running a game for a few sessions now. My players have been enjoying it. I’ll attack the artwork I did of the player characters for folks to check it out.

One thing the core rules didn’t make totally clear to me was a default method for young NPCs to take Influence over PCs. I’ve been using “this young NPC takes Influence over you” as a hard move when players fail rolls like Assess or Comfort/Support outside of battle. I’ve also prompted my players to say whether a young NPC has Influence over them when the story suggests that NPC does.

How does this sound to other GMs in the group? And how have you approached young NPCs taking Influence over player characters?

Here is the art:

Sonia (The Bull)

Captain Bowmaster (The Beacon)

Torque (The Outsider)

Panic (The Delinquent)

and

Halfpenny (The Protégé), a guest star who may be joining the campaign and the team.

I get sick when I play first-person shooter games, and thus have never been able to play Overwatch.

I get sick when I play first-person shooter games, and thus have never been able to play Overwatch.

I get sick when I play first-person shooter games, and thus have never been able to play Overwatch. At the same time I love the characters and world they have developed, and enjoy all the material produced that is incidental to the game itself. With that in mind, I have been tossing around the idea of a Masks game inspired by Overwatch.

I’m not sure if it makes sense to set such a game in the pre-existing world, with the players as a kind of rising New Overwatch, or if it would be more enjoyable to establish some general understandings based on the game (notably that there was some kind of worldwide crisis to pull a group of heroes together and a scandal that blew them apart) and do some world designing with players.

I am inclined towards the second one, which almost has a solar-punk apocalypse world feel, but I also think the first one might have some appeal to new players of Masks. Any ideas or opinions?

How well do the inter-character dynamics/mechanics work in Masks with less than 3 or 4 players?

How well do the inter-character dynamics/mechanics work in Masks with less than 3 or 4 players?

How well do the inter-character dynamics/mechanics work in Masks with less than 3 or 4 players?

I don’t understand Brass Brilliant’s move: “Provide validation to a potential ally”, from the deck of villainy.

I don’t understand Brass Brilliant’s move: “Provide validation to a potential ally”, from the deck of villainy.

I don’t understand Brass Brilliant’s move: “Provide validation to a potential ally”, from the deck of villainy. Any advice ?

Does anyone else feel Masks doesn’t do a great job of giving PCs a reason to be heroic beyond the social contract,…

Does anyone else feel Masks doesn’t do a great job of giving PCs a reason to be heroic beyond the social contract,…

Does anyone else feel Masks doesn’t do a great job of giving PCs a reason to be heroic beyond the social contract, and that the rulebook doesn’t explain how to handle villainous PCs very well?

I’m aware that allegiances frequently shift in the source material and that the game is all about PCs finding out who they really are, but I’ve always wished that there was a little more incentive for the players to stay on the straight and narrow. I’ve found in multiple previous campaigns that players who seem committed to the game’s theme in theory deviate from it pretty rapidly when they realize the game doesn’t explicitly prohibit that.

Does that make sense? Is there anything I can do as a GM to mitigate the problem when it comes up? Am I being too precious about genre emulation?