[Dread] Jenga beat up my dice! My results from the indie horror RPG.

[Asmor]

Alright, thanks for the advice!

 

[scholar]

Okay, that's cool. Let me ask you this: is there a mechanic for betraying that trust?

Without a betrayal mechanic, a simple way to do this would look like this:

1. For high tension situations in which an acting character has to rely on other character(s)--much like your lockpick with the lookout situation--inject an extra pull for what the acting character is relying on the other character(s) for. In the lockpick/lookout example, the lockpicker would have to pull twice: once to pick the lock and once keep a weathered eye out for dangers.
2. If at least one of the other players says that the acting player can trust him or her, then they don't have to make that extra pull. But...
3. If the tower falls, the trusted character shares the acting character's fate.

How does that sound? I know it doesn't exactly model what you're describing, but I think it would be fun. If you wanted to include a betrayal element, you could add the following between steps 2 and 3:

• The acting player can decide whether their character wants to actually trust the character that offered the trust.
• After the acting player has pulled but before the block is placed on top of the tower, the trusted character's player can call for a betrayal. In the fiction this doesn't have to be a big thing. In the lockpick example, it could be something as simple as the lockpicker finishing with the lock and turning to find the trusted character is not actually paying attention--perhaps he was picking his teeth, or tying his shoe, or cleaning his gun.
• If betrayed, the acting player must give the block to the betraying player, who can now use it in the place of a future pull--just by placing it on top of the tower when they need to make a pull.
• The betrayed player must now make the extra pull as if no one had offered their trust. There is no more trust so if the tower falls, the acting character is alone in his or her fate.

That should start some intraparty conflict.

actually, this is a great work for it... I think this might be the mod I go with when I run the cold city game

 

[Hypersmurf]

If betrayed, the acting player must give the block to the betraying player, who can now use it in the place of a future pull--just by placing it on top of the tower when they need to make a pull.

Oooo-ooh.

Sweet.

-Hyp.

 

[Asmor]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what incentive is there to accept the trust? At best, you won't get screwed over and gain no benefit. At worst, you end up having to make two pulls.

 

[Epidiah Ravachol]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what incentive is there to accept the trust? At best, you won't get screwed over and gain no benefit. At worst, you end up having to make two pulls.

This is for situations in which you would normally have to pull at least twice. In the lockpick scenario, the character picking the lock would have two pulls on the table. One for getting the lock open and on for getting it down unseen (let's say). Then another player steps in and says, "Trust me to keep watch for you, so you don't get caught."

Normally in Dread that would me the lockpicker would pull once for picking the lock and the other player would pull once to make sure they aren't discovered. And this might be all you need for your game. In fact, I think that works perfectly fine for the majority of the games. But if you want to focus your game on trust, you can introduce the trust mechanic. Now there is only one pull that needs to be made (because the bond of trust eliminates one of the pulls). That's the bonus: one less pull that needs to be made. At this stage, the only person risking anything is the person offering the trust. Because if that tower falls, they go out with lockpicker.

Those Trust mechanics can be used in games without the Betrayal mechanics, but if you want to also include the Betrayal mechanics, then it definitely gets harder to trust people. Although the betrayal isn't all that bad really. It comes down to one person saying "I'll help you get it done with one less pull." Followed by a, "Psych! I was just kidding. You have to make that pull after all." In the end, the sum total is the same . . .

That makes me think, perhaps I should refine that a bit more. Maybe if someone decides to use the betrayal option, you have to make that pull plus one more to compensate for being betrayed. Hmm . . .

Also, I put this link in the edit, but it might have been missed. I reworded the mechanics a bit and put them on the Dread blog. That might make things a little clearer.

 

[Asmor]

In that case, betrayal doesn't cost anything. Heck, being betrayed helps not just the betrayer, but the betrayee. Example:

Adam needs to make 2 pulls. There are 4 chances for Adam to twitch and knock over the tower.
He pulls a block (1)
puts it on top (2)
pulls a second block (3)
puts it on top (4)

Adam trusts Bill to watch over him. Bill betrays Adam.

Adam needs to make 2 pulls. There are 3 chances for Adam to twitch and knock over the tower.
He pulls a block (1)
Gives it to Bill
Pulls a second block (2)
Puts it on top (3)

So now Adam's got one less chance to screw up and Bill has a "free" pull.

I think I'd make it so that if Bill betrays Adam, whatever Adam was trusting Bill to do is treated as if Adam had elected not to pull a block. In the lock-picking case, someone would find him picking the lock, for example.

 

[Epidiah Ravachol]

I think I'd make it so that if Bill betrays Adam, whatever Adam was trusting Bill to do is treated as if Adam had elected not to pull a block. In the lock-picking case, someone would find him picking the lock, for example.

Beautiful!

That's just perfect. I'm going to officially add that to the blog.

 

[snarfoogle]

Alright, I apologize if this is in the rulebook, as I haven't purchased it, but how do you guys handle insanity? The rules as written would suggest each character pulling upon seeing a horrific sight, but 5 players all pulling, one after another would topple the tower in no time flat, resulting in something perhaps too brutal even for the Cthulhu mythos. But maybe it doesn't work that way. Has anyone using this approach noticed sanity bending events to be so few and/or late in the session to matter overly?

Group pulls make sense, but what happens if the tower falls? Everyone goes insane? That doesn't work either...

 

[Epidiah Ravachol]

Alright, I apologize if this is in the rulebook, as I haven't purchased it, but how do you guys handle insanity? The rules as written would suggest each character pulling upon seeing a horrific sight, but 5 players all pulling, one after another would topple the tower in no time flat, resulting in something perhaps too brutal even for the Cthulhu mythos. But maybe it doesn't work that way. Has anyone using this approach noticed sanity bending events to be so few and/or late in the session to matter overly?

By way of example let's say you have five characters reading over each other's shoulders trying to study that most unspeakable of Lovecraftian tomes all at once. They reach the end and each of them lays eyes on that which man was never meant to know. And let's say that you, as the host, want to make this a moment to remember. How, then, would Dread help you do this?

Well, you don't have to wait for the tower to fall to inflict madness upon a character. You could tell the players that they're pulling to avoid running away from the text, screaming. Or they could be pulling to avoid being permanently stricken with acute pupaphobia. Or they may have to pull for the courage to gaze upon that final maddening leaf.

Or, if you want to be a real bastard, you could tell them to make all three pulls.

The way Dread works, it then becomes their choice which of those pulls they want to make and which they are willing to suffer the consequences of. If, during this flurry of pulls, the tower should fall, then the character of the player responsible will most likely be driven to lasting and raving madness. I'd suggest some sort of madness that puts the rest of the readers immediately at risk.

Group pulls make sense, but what happens if the tower falls? Everyone goes insane? That doesn't work either...

In Dread you wouldn't have a group of people pull simultaneously. If, like in the situation above, you would have more than one player pulling, they should always take turns.

Does that address your concerns?

 

[Seonaid]

And I've pulled people away from the table in similar circumstances to clue them in before hand and give them the chance to shaft the other guy without the him knowing.

That's because you're a RBDM. :win: