Indirect conflicts

Indirect conflicts

Kynan 12 May 2008 19:10

I was reading over the new section on indirect contests, and it doesn't fully have the right "feel". It seems that, especially as a character's stat gets larger, it gets harder to justify that that some indirect, mundane "force" has the full effect of a character's stat. Of course, greater numbers can sometimes be the justification, but, for example, how many thugs do you need to have the effect of a Force/8? (This also brings up the question about what is considered a "normal" stat range for the average population.)

It also seems like it should be possible to use a resource to get a group of thugs who are better than you at a given stat. If I'm a typical Evil Weakling Mastermind (Wits-10, Force/Resolve-3, for example), one would think I could use my Evil Henchmen resource(TM) to get a group of Force-6 thugs to go beat someone up. (Thugs aren't known for their Wits.)

I think that indirect conflicts just take a lot of negotiation to figure out what model to use in any given situation. Sometimes a +compare, but other times a +challenge, or just plain negotiation and skip the mechanics. From a story point of view, these kinds of scenes are often more "set-up" than "culmination" anyways.

There's something I've been meaning to ask, and now seems a good time: Is there a way to "fake-down" a stat?

Re: Indirect conflicts

Dogun 12 May 2008 20:55

So, I think I agree that wits is well-suited to indirect stuff. I could see the justification for grace. Resolve and Force seem hard to apply to these situations. I'm guessing most people wouldn't try. If so, though, you can always talk it over when you throw the compares at each other. I'm sure someone out there has a good justification for an indirect conflict involving force.

I don't think resources should be used on the character-scale. I figure exceptionally shady people with mild means can probably hire some thugs and bravos for a quick job when the occasion calls for it, so long as they don't go overboard. Going overboard (siccing an army on someone) is another story altogether. 'Corwin sics Amber's populace, potency 5, focus 3 on someone' token used in an indirect conflict +compare is beyond overkill.

As far as challenges? Tuning a +challenge for optimal fun is tough. I can definitely see the case for a +compare for this sort of thing.

This is sort of how I imagine something with an indirect conflict might go:
Villain: I'd like to ambush you and your date. I won't be present, but I'll be coordinating.
Victim: OK. I don't mind mopping up a few goons and impressing my date, or taking some scrapes. I know and trust you, so let's just negotiate informally for a narrow, short-term result after the compare, ok?
Villain: Excellent. I'm not really interested in big +storybuilding myself, so if we can't agree on something afterwords, I'll be down a few goons, you'll be up some bruises? This would be an indirect combat.
Victim: Cool. Let's do the +compare.
Villain does: sty-in + wits.
Victim does: phy-st + skl-wm + skl-fm + grace
Villain: Classic ambush. Distraction, a few guys running interference to keep annoying interlopers away. A few thugs who mean business.
Victim: Makes sense. I'll just slice, run, and headbutt my way through them.

Both parties agree to compares. The result comes up: villain wins, 1 conseqence.
Victim: Curses.
Villain: Heh. Neat. Anyhow, all I want out of this is to drag you (blindfolded) back to my place where I can deliver a chilling monologue. You can escape unharmed.
Victim: Works for me.
<they pose it out>

alternately: victim wins, 1 consequence.
Villain: Curses
Victim: Conan was an amatuer. Anyhow, I want to interrogate a goon and learn who sent him.
Villain: Sounds great. They are goons though, so they won't know everything. Something about who sent them and where you can find him certainly, though. Maybe some of the why.
Victim: I can live with that.
<they pose it out>

Maybe it'd be far uglier in practice, though?

Re: Indirect conflicts

ect 13 May 2008 17:55

So, I think I agree that wits is well-suited to indirect stuff. I could see the justification for grace. Resolve and Force seem hard to apply to these situations. I'm guessing most people wouldn't try. If so, though, you can always talk it over when you throw the compares at each other. I'm sure someone out there has a good justification for an indirect conflict involving force.

Remember that Force is not just physical strength. The gang boss who rules through pure furious intimidation is using Force to guide his indirect conflicts, just as the patient webspinner who waits for exactly the right set of circumstances to strike is using Resolve.