Trollbabe barrage II (split)
Moreno R.:
New questions!
1) A Trollbabe can be harmed only by a failed reroll. But what about a Relationship? Can the well-being (or even the liberty or the life) of a Relationship be the jeopardized in a conflict, even if the trollbabe don't use them for rerolls?
2) A NPC want to attack a trollbabe: can the trollbabe's player use only the relationship to fight? (for example, the bodyguard of the trollbabe hit the attacking character in the face, stunning him, while the trollbabe just look at the scene, bored). What if the trollbabe isn't even present at the scene? ("Go inside that building and punch that guy in the face, please"). What if the trollbabe players say that the relatonship goes into the building to hit the guy in the face, without the trollbabe knowing about it?
Ron Edwards:
Hi Moreno,
I've been preparing an answer, but the Ronnies have been taking all my time. I'll reply after I start some more feedback threads.
Best, Ron
Moreno R.:
OK, I will add questions to the queue when they are asked or when they come to me. I don't mind waiting, it's better to wait for a more thoughtful answer than demand a hurried one.
3) A trollbabe at Scale 2 kill the chief of a small group of cutthroats (6 in total, after she killed half of the group), and then become their new chief (take the small group as a relationship)
But what does it means, regarding any single man? I mean, seeing that every one of these six had a name, the relationship will always be with the group made up by these six character, or the relationship is with "the band of cutthroats that follow the trollbabe"? If for example some of them die during a narration, at the next adventure I can add new recruits to the group, I can't add new recruits to the group, or I HAVE to add new recruits to the group?
4) It's possible, if the trollbabe player want, to "merge" a old relationship (a single person) with that group, having a single relationship with the group that include that person, now? Instead of dropping the old relationship between adventures? (assuming that the player doesn't want that relationship anymore)
5) I that gang get "killed" during a conflict, this mean that the GROUP is destroyed/killed (meaning that it could simply break up and leave the trollbabe), or that EVERY MEMBER OF THAT GROUP is killed? (this second option would turn the game very dark when the trollbabe will sacrifice cities or entire armies...)
6) If the trollbabe player doesn't say what their relationship are doing, I can make them do what I want, or I have to ask to the player? (I am asking this because some relationship are ignored by the player, and I would like to know what are my limit in making them "more interesting"...)
Moreno R.:
7) The 2nd edition manual says: "When injured, the trollbabe begins all new Series differently: one box already along the path, so that upon failure of the first roll, she proceeds to the injury box right away. Therefore she is limited to a total of two re-rolls instead of three. The idea is that you “start inconvenienced” due to the pre-existing injury.[...]
If an injured trollbabe is injured again during a later conflict, then the second injury is described but has no game effect. The existing drawback remains in place, unchanged. In other words, once you’re injured, that’s your status until it’s fixed.
It seems pretty straightforward. But I remember distinctly reading recent actual plays where if you started the second series in a conflict already injured, you started that series as "inconvenienced". , but if you get injured again (an one bad roll is enough), you start the third series as INJURED, meaning "with two boxes already filled", and you go straight to helplessness with the first failed roll in the first series.
What is the right rule? The text on the game manual is correct (and the error is in the actual play threads) or it's the other way around?
Ron Edwards:
Quote
1) A Trollbabe can be harmed only by a failed reroll. But what about a Relationship? Can the well-being (or even the liberty or the life) of a Relationship be the jeopardized in a conflict, even if the trollbabe don't use them for rerolls?
Jeopardized by a trollbabe, sure! "I kill him." Relationship NPCs are no different from any other NPC if we're talking about them being targets. That'd certainly be a conflict, too. (And could the trollbabe use the Relationship for a re-roll in such a conflict? Sure!)
A Relationship NPC can be threatened by an NPC or GM-driven physical circumstance, yes, but you have to understand the rules. Remember that the GM has no "goal" the way the player has to state for the trollbabe's goal. So the GM cannot do the typical thing of putting the Relationship NPC into a trap and expect the trollbabe to come running to help. The player could just ignore it and the GM can't kill the Relationship NPC (although that might mean the character has a bad time).
The best way to handle such a situation is for the GM to come up with a genuine risk to the trollbabe if the NPC is hurt or killed. If he can, then it's time to say "Conflict!" and make it happen.
In such a conflict, if the Relationship is not used for a re-roll, then the results to the NPC short of death are going to be dictated by the narration. The GM can rough up the NPC quite a lot but can't actually wound him or her or worse.
The take-home message is that in this game, the GM cannot hold injury or death to the NPC as a threat to the player. This may appear as a break in the rules to a traditional mind-set for these things, but it's a mis-play, not a rules break. Conflicts must pose risk to the trollbabe, period.
Quote
2) A NPC want to attack a trollbabe: can the trollbabe's player use only the relationship to fight? (for example, the bodyguard of the trollbabe hit the attacking character in the face, stunning him, while the trollbabe just look at the scene, bored).
So here, we're starting with the assumption of conflict. By definition, the trollbabe must personally be at risk. So no, what you describe is not possible as the *total* of what is happening or could happen in the conflict.
It could, however, be perfectly all right as part of a narration. A lot of things which have to be stated prior to a roll in most RPGs end up as narrations in Trollbabe.
Quote
What if the trollbabe isn't even present at the scene? ("Go inside that building and punch that guy in the face, please").
That's different. That's the trollbabe player saying what the Relationship NPC does, and that's ordinary use of the rules. What you're asking is whether this constitutes a conflict. It would not be a Fighting conflict because the trollbabe is not at risk. If it were a Social conflict and if risk of that kind were easily understood to be possible from this situation, then it's legal. In that case, then the punch is just part of free-and-clear and the narrations of the conflict itself will proceed much further forward in time.
Quote
What if the trollbabe players say that the relatonship goes into the building to hit the guy in the face, without the trollbabe knowing about it?
Not a problem. That's an exact use of the rules as well, identical to the above question, and with the same primary issue, whether it's a conflict.
I'll get to the second post when I can.
Best, Ron
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page