Errr, whoops. I meant to come with you. I think I might have got the directions confused. Weren't you heading out?
...noooo. I kinda made a big point about feeling too guilty to run off and trigger Drazhu to start wrecking things. Also, being terrified about having to kill Drazhu. I wouldn't be making such a big deal if I was just leaving!
Hell, I said I was going west several times.
Sorry! I tried to catch up on everything that was said but I guess my reading comprehension wasn't at its highest at the time. I intended to leave with you.
It's fine. A lot of stuff tends to happen - things are going to be missed. Just so long as you aren't leaving me to dry.
Sorry guys long day yesterday. Getting caught up now
so reno you are switching where you went? or just going with the mistake?
I've already given him the chance to do either, without much trouble really.
Also yes Sora, I did see, but then things had already happened so I figured we just called it canon and fixed it in-character.
I had intended to address that to Mini, not you Ammy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know, Himnon, I have to love your sense of priority sometimes.
"The zombie horde is closing! We have to move!"
"Yeah, you do that. I'm gonna look these things over some more, k?"
I actually was imagining myself watching as I waited for everyone to get through the door, so there would be no wasted time. But I do think that deathly curiosity about magic is something that might be interesting about the character, and it matches the alignment (discover something about a magical mystery).
Still works. Let me try another one.
"Damn it, they're right on our backs! Why aren't you helping us?!"
"I'm fine. You'll be fine. These things interest me. No problems here. Now if you'll excuse me, I was doing something before you rudely interrupted."
"I wonder what they'd look like with wings...?"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do wonder.
Lots of travel these next days. Slow posting but will resume regular posting on Tuesday. I'll try to post in the meantime
its ok, its a safe assumption that the zombies keep chewing on you as you sit there and have a cup of tea
I think I'm officially withdrawing from this campaign. I've got too much on my plate otherwise with classes starting up. I never really got into Nathan or the class. It's just a whole bunch of small reasons, sorry.
Sad to see you go, but it's understood. Good luck!
shame
we are almost through this module, and we can all decide if it is worth continuing or not when we wrap up.
I have gotten a better handle on how it works, though lots more to learn.
So expect a pause in the GP once this is finished and we can discuss then. I will lay out my expectations of what I need to do to improve and will ask everyone for their feedback as well.
But until then...we finish up.
I feel like I'm being punished just a little too hard for a single fail. I get not 1, but 2 hard moves in the form of damage thrown my way and then another soft move to boot. It's more than a bit harsh.
I honestly haven't posted anything because I'm scared it'll go even worse for the group.
First If you don't post then you will take the full effect. So not posting can only make it worse
Second you took one hard move and one soft. You chose damage for the second. The hard move was directly as a result of the golden opportunity you provided by charging into his pentagram and smashing it.
Third the exploding pentagram was warned for two rounds before it exploded. Again you ALL ignored it. No spout lore, no discern realities nothing.
Again let's finish and I wil do a debrief and we can decide if the experiment was successful or not. I will make the post in a about 4 hours as to the results
ok
so with the exception of looting and EoS move lets do a debrief and decide if it is worth continuing on. I have another module that I would tie into this one, just to continue getting my feet wet, then it would be off to a grander world tour, as it were. My thoughts are below.
What I need to improve on for the players
* Though I have gotten a better grasp, I still am not the best at how to handle the soft fail. I definitely am getting there, but I need to keep working on it.
*I need to know your moves better. For example misunderstanding Amaranth's move with the hold was a poor mistake.
*Sometimes I do not describe what I see as well as I should. I have done pretty well at adjusting on the fly, but could do better.
What I ask the players to improve
*It seems to me that there is a lot of "why are we being punished" said in gameplay. I promise you that I am not against you, nor and I "punishing anyone". I will ask that, if we move forward, that folks stop saying that. If you really want to know why you are getting hit, feel free to ask. Not every single time, but on occasion, thats fine
To me there is a difference between. "Hey, I am confused as to why I got hit there. Can you explain?" and "why are you punishing me for trying something?" I find the former to be cooperative, while I find the latter to be adversarial.
That is what I like about this system, is that there are no dice for me to roll, so there is no particular moment of joy at a high roll, because you are doing all of it. I like all the characters, like a parent, equally, and I am not out to get anyone.
-------------
Now having said all of that, I am happy to continue, would love to continue, as long as at least 3 of you are interested. Feel free to give me your feedback of other things you would like me to consider, please don't pile on, but I am open to it all.
Those that want to continue go ahead with an EoS move and then we can continue, or not. This was an experiment for me, and I consider it a success, not a rousing success but a success. Call it a B-.
The floor is yours, as it were.
I think a lot of "why are we being punished" comments are going to be as a side effect of the side effect of misunderstanding the soft regarding soft moves. Note - Moves, not Fails like you wrote. It's the complication, the added cost if you want to do it, the "almost how you wanted", the "bad stuff coming"...but not a failure. On a 7-9, it's still essentially a success, but not a grand one.
As for 6-...well, that is a miss. Fail still isn't a given, but you're damn well going to feel the consequences.
Thing to pay attention to though - certain moves constrict GM behaviour on a 6-, simply because they say how it plays out. It isn't common that this is the case - most moves don't specify what happens on 6-, or have a line that means "GM makes a move" - but it does happen. Taking "Unstoppable Force" as the example:
On a 6-, hold 1, but when you spend it, the GM will add a complication.
As written, any consequences from the move come when you spend the hold, but not before. That's the rule here. The move still behaves as normal - when they spend that one hold, they do the thing they spent it on - there's just a complication. I think this instance ties back into understanding the moves. Amaranth spent her hold to "Do great damage", but by the information given, she only managed to activate it. Yes, she wiped away a bit of the pentagram, but it feels superficial. It doesn't feel like it impacted the effectiveness or function of it, just when it went off. There's no gain. I say "feel like" because I don't exactly have your level of info, but there's still an issue when it appears you haven't done something when you're supposed to.
If you want a core example of moves that specify their 6- results, look at Carouse and the Druid's Shapeshifter.
On a miss, you still choose one, but things get really out of hand.
On a miss hold 1 in addition to whatever the GM says.
These ones are a little different - They both invite the GM to create consequences right away from the 6- - but they're alike in that you still get something. Carouse still states to pick a benefit from the list. Shapeshifter still gets a hold to use on one of the animal form's moves. Both of these things happen - the Carouser gets the benefit of their choice, and the Shapeshifter has the form move go off as it's supposed to when they spend their hold. There's just added badness from their 6-. Carouser befriends a useful NPC, but a bar fight breaks out. Shapeshifter turns into a bull, and spends their hold for a charge, but when they revert afterwards they're REALLY aggressive, and have to defy danger not to immediately bear down on anything moving about a lot.
You get what you want, but there's consequences.------------------
Oh, and the rest of the "Why are we being punished" stuff? You've proven pretty opportunistic when it comes to opportunities to do badness on us, at least by comparison to what we're used to. I mean, I understand the logic you use when that happens, but you really go for it.
The worse bit of that though, is not making clear just why exactly these things are happening. Say, earlier, when I took the attack from trying to parlay with the Tunnel-Keep - You stated everything I did happening, and then Drazhu doing a bunch of other stuff, followed by him just nailing me outright. Which was a REALLY bad way to do it if it was because of me ordering the Tunnel-Keep.
If I'm being attacked because of my attempt at parlaying with the Tunnel-Keep, then I should be able to see that. Attack me mid-parlay attempt - the cause and effect chain is clear there. He's interrupting with an attack because of the Parlay attempt. Have a few lines basically going "Really? Order MY minions about right in front of me? Who do you think you are?" Then the other stuff happens - the wind, the sconce, the walk, etc. Making everything happen, and then having him do a load of other stuff before hitting me with the consequences...it breaks the sequence of cause and effect, and it's just confusing. See what I mean?
There might be something else, but this is all I can think of right now.
Fair enough, I accept your criticism, and as I said I am still working on the soft fails, I have committed to improving on that...I can see adding a little more flavor to help show that a golden opportunity has been taken, thats a valid bit of info and I will continue to work on that.
However, are you willing to accept my request of no longer using the adversarial approach to seeking out answers? I need folks to commit to that if I am going to continue. And again, we do not have to, but I know myself and I know that, that kind of approach from the players makes me defensive, and then it is harder for me to have a good time. We are all here to have a good time so, if you think I am being too harsh and that takes away your fun, you are welcome to ask about it, but do it in a way that is collaborative, not adversarial.
[b] A perfect example of all of this is the subject of Unstoppable force[b]
Now to comment on Amaranth. She didn't activate it. She destroyed it. It was supposed to be activated when your blood was spilled into it, then it would have increased Drahzu's power 10 fold. She deactivated it, but rolled poorly so it exploded with warning. All that said. Had it been approached to me as "Hey I it looks like there was no gain to breaking part of the pentagram, whats up?" that is one thing, but instead it took the form of me "punishing you all" Do you see what I am getting at here?
I would have happily answered that question. "Well you don't know exactly what it was supposed to do, but you do know that whatever it is doing now is not what is was meant to do. Drahzu's experiment has been halted, but to what end?" or something like that. Instead I was forced to break down my logic by naming the "moves" which as you know as a GM I am not supposed to do.
My point is that I want to play "with" you all not "against" you all, and if we can shift the paradigm of how we are phrasing things I think that can happen
I really think it'd help your thinking if you'd stop using "fails". It adds a certain bias to the approach.
================================
Regarding the language stuff...I understand what you're saying, but I don't think it's quite that simple. People are saying these things to air their grievances, and they want to be clear when they do that. It's kind of cathartic to do so. Sure, the punishment talk might be a bit far there, but they need to communicate clearly if they're feeling hurt or upset, and the wording you're putting forward doesn't quite do that. If people don't get across how they're feeling, that's just going to add to tension.
I think there's a in-between point in the language between the language we've been using and the language you're suggesting. It's generally fine, but it doesn't quite address the sorts of things going through people's minds when they say how they feel like they're being punished. You understand what I'm saying? We need to figure out the upper limit for these circumstances, when someone needs to say they feel hurt or upset. It's fine language for general use, though.
The important thing is that nobody's being a dick.
================================
Overall, I think most of this stems from communication issues, really. There's a disconnect between what someone is doing and its impact. It makes things a lot worse in the minds of people.
Also, being maybe being a bit less jumpy with "Golden Opportunities" and the stuff. Going back to Amaranth - Drazhu might have been able to do something, but even if the circle isn't massive, I think 15ft across means it's big enough for her not to need to be in arm's reach, or even within a step. Besides, Unstoppable Force means she is in motion and coming like a truck. You do not reach out and slap a truck if you want your hand to be fine after.
...well, I think that's an example of something else. Since you didn't understand the move at the time, you issued the damage as a consequence of the miss, and she didn't get what she wanted. With the move explained, you change the thing so she does what she was supposed to, and add the complication...but you don't alter what happened before. She had to suffer the side effects of her bad roll twice, and when she complained about it, you changed the reason for the damage to justify having both things happen. That's not cool, man. That damage came from a bad roll, not as a Golden Opportunity the way you said. When the circumstances change, it's not fair to attach a different reason to it so it doesn't need changing. Don't be afraid to retcon something when new information comes in.
I take your criticism on mechanics. I do not feel a need to dive into things past any further. I am committed to making the changes I have outlined
If anyone else has any concerns let me know, if they are different than what I outlined
I will need folks to actually post that they want to continue and are willing to adjust their verbiage before continuing. I do not want this to seem like shaming so if you would rather send a pm that is fine
Again maybe the experiment is over. That is ok. No harm no foul in my book.
I hope we continue but we shall see
What I ask the players to improve*It seems to me that there is a lot of "why are we being punished" said in gameplay.
...
I don't remember having said very much like this, but if it were to happen in the future I would be open to being corrected, and I would imagine that others would too.
I would be happy to continue the campaign.
I'm fine to go on, and I'll try to be careful about what I say...but maaaaan, I need healing.
Excellent.
You can assume full healing before we move on
It would appear so.
Ys hasn't really had much to do. Her player hasn't really been as active across the board anyway, as far as I can tell.
Shoot over a PM and see what they say?
EDIT: And the moment I say that, they make a post. Man, the timing on that.
Actually, I was kinda waiting on the party returning, and my life got a little crazy for a little while there, so sorry for the weird low activity spot. I would love to go on, as I like this character, I just... lost the ability to post more than a couple a day, and prioritized the ones I was GMing.
Okay... so the word 'punished' triggers you somehow. That's okay, I'll try to avoid it. I suppose it does come across as adversarial but then I got 2 damage rolls and what felt like an unwelcome truth from a single failed roll. Earlier with the whipmaster Nathan asked something similar, you explained that he was fighting a boss-level guy on his own. That's fine except he rolled 10+ meaning things go his way, done. In boss-level encounters a partial success may invoke a damage roll, but that's a hard move. You don't take a hard move, add another soft move and then also no benefit gained. That's why Nathan called you up that time.
I called you up on the 'punishment' as I did expect aome form of pain from rolling a 6, it's only natural, just not this much, especially when from my experience the Tunnel Keep was hanging back already, only ever read of Drazhu stepping into the circle. I could have expected a hit from Drazhu, seeing as I did not defy danger at all, and the unwelcome truth would be part of the move's complication. It was really just the added hit from the Tunnel Keep that did it for me at that time.
Also, if we're to do a review of how it is thus far, then we should absolutly discuss what has passed. I've never heard a film review say 'and now let's not talk.about the film at all, it's in the past'. Just a note.
I enjoy the campaign so far and am still very much ready to move along. I'm also ready to step aside if that's what you wish.
In the end the little downside of DW is that the DM moves are all too clear to the players, especially damage as a hard move catches us up. We are ready and willing to take a hit, but we have the pre-conceived notion of whether or not we could expect one at all.
by not discussing what is passed, I meant I do not want to argue about what is passed.
Also as I have failed to explain, it is not the "word" it is the pervasive thought that I am trying to screw you guys over. That is the tone there.
But since I failed to explain it to you then I will try again now
You received an option of damage or -1 forward for failing your move, you chose damage. The attack from Drahzu I viewed as a golden opportunity, which was not clear, fair enough. Then when it was pointed out that you should have damaged the pentagram, I retconned that you did, then added the complication of it is going to explode, which happened three rounds later.
So you easily could have taken an attack from Drahzu and -1 until you reset your feet. Honestly I do not see that as that bad a result. It is certainly not a punishment. Had you immediately said, "I don't understand why I am getting hit once, and have to make a choice of another bad effect, I would have explained it happily. The exploding pentagram could have been avoided by leaving the room, or going behind the throne.
Do you see what I am saying?
Now as far as Nathan goes, I explained at the time that I was misreading moves, I adjusted after that. So that I am not going to rehash. I admitted I messed that up at the time, well after the fact. Again at the time Nathan responded with "you hate my character this is unfair, im just not going to roll anything until you tell me to". I reacted poorly, and got defensive. Now I know that I am prone to that which is why I am telling folks I need them to not take that tone.
You received an option of damage or -1 forward for failing your move, you chose damage.
d4 damage or -1 ongoing on attacks or Defy Danger until you take a moment to regain your footing
As written, that's 3 choices. Take damage, take -1 ongoing (not forward, which would only apply once instead of forever) on trying to attack with no stated endpoint to the effect, or have to keep ambiguously Defying Danger until you take a moment to get your footing...which would have been yet another golden opportunity when done, and was honestly far too confusing an option anyway. There was only one option that wasn't an utter mess, as written.
Not trying to be rude here or anything. It's just that the options you say now aren't the ones that were said before, and really the damage was the only decent option from the writing. The others were just painful and confusing, for differing reasons. Probably worth a proofread, next time.
It's worth being careful with roll modifiers anyway, especially ongoing ones. A -1 or a +1 can make a significant impact on your rolls.
Ok I give up.
Your right I gave an additional option to avoid all of it, and that is me screwing you over. Then I forgot I gave you that option and that really shows I'm trying to screw you over. Cause that makes sense.
Honestly guys I'm through explaining myself. It seems like nothing I say is going to change the paradigm here.
...I was trying to say the writing was unclear. You had a damage option, a -1 ongoing to attacks which hadn't been given an end condition, and an option that required you to "Defy Danger" until you took moment to get your footing, the problem being that you didn't know what danger you were defying. For all they knew, they had to Defy Danger just to be allowed to get their footing, or do anything at all really. Though, any time spent getting their footing would likely invoke a Golden Opportunity by virtue of not trying to defend themselves in a combat situation, if they didn't presumably defy danger even more to get into a safe position, giving them a choice between vulnerability or being temporarily removed from combat. It doesn't avoid the issue.
We aren't trying to state you're out to get us. This is going to get miserable though, if you start getting defensive if we try to say there was an issue somewhere. You're edging to a point where we're not allowed to question the handling of something without you starting to throw accusations at US of trying to make you out as being a malicious GM. We've been shown we're allowed to ask for explanations thus far, but not re-evaluations.
As much as it's uncomfortable being told we don't like the way you handled something, these are the sort of concerns that want to be listened to. Less so when the complaints are stemming from a single source, but a lot more when they're more widespread.
===
We aren't trying to accuse you of anything. You're being more accusing than we are right now. Perhaps a bit condescending at this point? I don't know.
Tone is not something you can really put into words very well. For any given sentence, the tone intended when written and the tone received when read are two different things, and the received tone has a lot to do with who's reading. Can you give us the benefit of the doubt here? Please? I really don't like how this is going.
This is exactly why I said I wasn't going to rehash. If you can't accept my explanation then you can't. But I can not for the life of me figure out why you all feel the need to bring up everything over and over. I said I need to work on my clarity, so why bring up the 3 choices? If anything it supports my point that if you are confused ask a question.
I have made a simple request. Either folks can move forward with positivity as requested or not.
But I give up on trying to explain how I was not trying to punish folks. All it does is start arguments.
I do not have system mastery, nor will I in the next three months. I am going to make mistakes, I am going to misread something, I am going to not be fully clear. Guaranteed. If you can move forward with that and not be adversarial in your language. We play. If you can't then we don't.
Rehashing decisions and then having what I say thoroughly parsed for errors is not fun. And I am not doing it anymore. I have clearly stated what I did during the occasion in question. I'm done with that.
I'm sure there was something I was trying to say here, but I've honestly forgotten what it was. Spent so much time being concerned about whether I said what I intended to that I forgot what I intended to say.
Can we have loot now? I need shiny things. They're good for you. They make you feel better.
If it was a case of confusion then I would ask, but in this case I had done the thing, not feeling any confusion in your writing. I mistook it for something else, but felt no confusion in that mistake, I thought fully that I had understood it.
Regardless I was kinda busy at the time, given that it was one of few times I actually get to spend with my fiancé, so I'm sorry if I mistook anything at that time.
Then came the confusion of what happened to the circle, which I did immediately ask a question about. Sora had already stated that I would get a hold regardless, but I miss posts so no harm no foul, it was then properly explained and then I received another soft move for executing on my hold which was pretty much the moment I spoke out. I did so before posting anything else here.
I should have been more of 'I don't know why this is all happening?' rather than 'Why am I being punished?' as to avoid creating the "Us vs. You" context, which was never my intent.
I have a different connotation to the word punish, much less adversarial and much more that of a parent. Punishment is being dealt when characters/players make mistakes, whether they know they are making them or not. A parent must sometimes punish their children.
In hindsight, I may have had to Defy Danger to not get hit by Drazhu.
I understood the second hit I took (from the Tunnel Keep) as a given, not a choice, which is me misreading what you said. But it still felt as the result of a 6- when the result of a 6- is specifically described in the move. That is how it felt, to me, nothing you can do now is going to change that, nor do you have to.
When I then got the ugly truth on the circle, I flipped my s~## a little, I'll be honest, so I decided I would calm down first before I would post anything, hence I will admit, without reading back, that I might have had an adversarial tone.
We all make mistakes, I don't wish to drone on about yours, and I want to admit mine.
So, my bad, my INT was 15, not my WIS. I think I had intended to take wizard casting. Is that different enough that I won't step on your toes, himnon?
The only XP tied to being in a fight is when you manage to botch a roll during the fight. Murderising is not how you gain XP as standard, though the GM might still give you some for the fight if they feel like it.
The group questions for EOS grant XP to everyone if they're answered with yes, so that's 3XP. After that, alignment and bonds are an individual affair.
You ought to resolve your bond with Nathan for another XP, since he's left. If anyone has bonds with Nathan or Kara, they want resolving.
So, my bad, my INT was 15, not my WIS. I think I had intended to take wizard casting. Is that different enough that I won't step on your toes, himnon?
I have no problem with it.
So amaranth is no a flaming piece of iron? That's not frightening at all! Lol. That's funny
Looks like everyone is ready. Shy I believe you will be the one with the plot hook for the next module
As a reminder I'm gonna tie another module onto this one to see if I do do a better job. Then we will debrief again and decide if we want to continue to a larger campaign.
I was going with Obsidian when she cools down, aka volcanic glass-like rock, but yeah, something solid in there.
set up my spellbook, going for more utility spells, and Ys's combat strategy is to arrow them from a range. is it reasonable to say i learned this from reading Shy's books, plus probably some mentorship from her (that hads been retroactively going on)?