Dungeon World and Social Conflict

[Manbearcat]

The Sway rejoiner should be no harder than a soft move though, should it not? You are prevented from applying a hard move because failure is off the table. So you're pretty much limited to hard bargain or ugly choice as they tick the clock. Since the player can decline to take the bargain and lose the success or be forced to tick the clock and react to the ugly choice.

Yup, that's correct. Check my edit. That post should say - "Ticking THEIR Clock 1 on a 7-9 or 6- (not YOUR Clock)."

Here is a quick hypothetical of how it might go down:

Cleric (addressing a convened war council and trying to convince the Defense Minister to do thing x vs thing y):

"The last time the <Horsemen Empire>raided the granaries, it wasn't to steal the foodstuffs or starve the people. It was to draw the forces of <Neighboring Empire> out into the open field and drown them in hooves and arrows. They kept repeating that until it was death by a thousand cuts."

Sway 7-9 (Your Clock ticks 1) but they follow-up with a rejoinder you have to answer.

GM: The room breaks out in quiet whispers at the effectiveness of your volley. The Defense Minister's tilts his head sideways, nods a moment a moment, but doesn't concede. When he clears his throat, the chamber noise abruptly vanishes. He looks at you squarely.

"<Neighboring Empire> doesn't have our cavalry. Not the numbers. Not the skill. Not the armaments. We'll see who drowns whom in hooves and arrows..."

---

Now the player is going to have to deal with this rejoinder before they can get back on the offense with Sway. He's not going to be influenced with guile, charm, or argument until you give him a reason to be.

 

[Manbearcat]

@chaochou

That's perfect. I agree. It should be broken out into two moves. Going to recap the possibilities of Social Conflict with that.

BASIC MOVES

Argue
When you assert yourself through force of intellect, roll Int: On a 10+, choose 2. On a 7-9, choose 1.

• They accept some of your argument (tick your Clock 1 time).
• Their allies don't take up their cause.
• They're an open book (take +1 forward to Discern Realities against them).
• One of your allies is emboldened (name one ally to take +1 forward against them).

Threaten
When you weave threats into your demands, roll Str: On a 10+, choose 2. On a 7-9, choose 1.

• They shrink away from you (tick your Clock 1 time).
• Their don't plot to betray you
• They're on the defensive (take +1 forward to Hack and Slash against them)
• One of your allies is emboldened (name one ally to take +1 forward against them).

Consort
When you show someone you care about what they think, roll Cha. On a 10+, choose 2. On a 7-9, choose 1.

• They return the gesture (tick your Clock 1 time).
• They're intrigued (take +1 forward to Sway).
• They reveal what is important to them and how they think.
• They aren't offended by your advance or openness.

Sway
When you influence someone with guile, charm, or argument, roll Cha. If you know what is important to them or how they think and use it against them, you cannot get a 6-. If you do not, you cannot get a 10+. On a 10+, they're convinced or nearing it (tick your Clock 2 times). On a 7-9, their position softens (tick your Clock 1 time), but they offer a rejoinder that requires an answer.

Defy Danger

Discern Realities

Spout Lore

---

COMPETING CLOCKS (4 Tick vs 4 Tick, but your Clock may be bigger if the opponent has a particular advantage; status, scale, etc)

 

[Manbearcat]

@Nagol and @chaochou (and anyone else)

What do you think about the fictional triggers for the moves? Do you feel like they're specific enough or do you feel like they should be narrowed a bit?

 

[chaochou]

@Manbearcat

Since you ask, I think sway is a bit loose.

Could be like: When you use guile, charm, or persuasion to try and get a thing you want...

 

[Manbearcat]

I think so too.

I was thinking it needs a further stipulation as well. How about:

“When your adversary doesn't have you reeling and you use guile, charm, or persuasion to try and get a thing you want.”

Also, for Consort, what about (a) thinks, feels, or needs (instead of just thinks), and (b) roll Wis?

 

[Nagol]

I like Consort expansion and using Wis.

They map pretty well to the Persuade, Intimidate, Conversation, and Seduction set found in Hero.

I do not want you to have you rethink basic mechanics so feel free to disregard. Two clocks would work best if the two sides have indirect competing goals (I need to rescue these people before the building collapses! I'm burning the building down!). These feel more like a direct competition tug-of-war. I would be tempted to have a single tracker that normally starts at zero and completes at either +3 (they're persuaded!) or -3 (they cannot be swayed!) Advantageous and disadvantageous starts would start the tracker at a number other than zero.

 

[Manbearcat]

@Nagol

What about just using this as a Clock/Tracker:

* d6

* Starts at 2 (disadvantage PCs), 3 (neutral), 4 (advantage PCs).

* "Ticks" upward for PCs success. "Ticks" downward for PC setback.

* 6 is win condition. 1 is loss condition.

 

[Nagol]

@Nagol

What about just using this as a Clock/Tracker:

* d6

* Starts at 2 (disadvantage PCs), 3 (neutral), 4 (advantage PCs).

* "Ticks" upward for PCs success. "Ticks" downward for PC setback.

* 6 is win condition. 1 is loss condition.

Sounds good! 3 up vs 2 down is quite doable and having an easy to see tracker is worth it! Disadvantage is really rough though. Better not fail your first gambit. If you want to be kinder 0 and 7 as end conditions. Or make it a d8 and start on 4.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I really don't like Sway. It's set up as as pretty much requiring a Consort action to take the reveal what's important option to be useful, and, if you do that, it becomes the absolute no-brainer option to go for. I'm also a bit uncertain how binding the 'can't betray, don't take offense, their allies don't aid' options are. If only for that action, okay, but that's not as useful if I have more actions to take and those options get put back on the table for a fail result on that check. Meanwhile if they persist, a combination of those kinda really locks down the results.

I don't have a copy of AW, so I'm not sure what the binding resolution states for the clocks would be. What binds on a success, and what binds on a failure? I see a case where a 7-9 on Threaten ends up with +1 forward on Hack and Slash but you lose the argument and must accept those conditions because the MC's move is to tick the clock down to 1. That seems like it might his a situation where the cost negates the chosen benefit? Need more elaboration on the overall win/loss states to do more evaluation.

 

[EpicureanDM]

I've never been a fan of things like Threaten or Intimidate being classified as social actions, especially if, as your current design suggests, they allow someone to use a physical stat like Strength to substitute for a social stat like Charisma. Imagine how you would react if someone's trying to convince you of something via Sway or Argue and then their buddy jumps in and puts a fist under your nose:"Agree with my friend's carefully crafted argument or I'll beat your ass." Would that make you more or less likely to go along with someone else's friendly or intellectual attempt to gain your agreement? If it's less likely, then why should it count favorably towards resolving the conflict? If it's more likely, then why have a social conflict at all? Just beat them up until they agree without the need for sweet talk. If you're engaging in a social conflict, it's presumably because you can't use physical force to get what you want. So why should physical force be an option once you're in the social conflict?

I'd remove Threaten entirely, but maybe I'm not considering social conflicts where the use of physical threats can be helpful? I'm assuming that since Strength is being rolled, Threaten actions are made against people involved in the conflict. You can Threaten someone's loved one who's in a house across town or suggest that you'll destroy a valuable bridge in a nearby province, but that sort of indirect threat would be better handled with Charisma or Intelligence, right?