Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Old Fezziwig" data-source="post: 9653269" data-attributes="member: 59">Right on.  I appreciate it.  It's not mind control. If a character is persuaded, that doesn't mean that the character changes their mind necessarily. It just means that they've agreed to go along with whatever's being proposed or their arguments against doing so have not won the day. The player can of course decide their little dude has been persuaded, but it's not mandatory.  I'm wary of using examples from fiction too much, as I don't think they're as useful as they seem to be, but when the Fellowship of the Ring decides to go over the Redhorn Pass instead of through Moria, Gimli's not of a different mind than he was before they started up the mountains -- he would still prefer to go through the Mines, but he's lost the argument, so up he goes with the rest.  Ob(stacle)s are set in the same way as DCs more or less.  The general table is as follows:[ATTACH=full]404803[/ATTACH]They do do the Duel of Wits in post #5 in that thread, and, what Si Juk says does make a difference, both in terms of setting the stakes and the fiction (I'm sure that in play there was more, but I've bolded a few places where they do say things -- in the end, the dice will determine how much these statements matter, but all this is going to push into the framing for the new situation, which I've bolded at the end):Cool, that sounds like it could be fun.  Without knowing the context of that scene, who the characters are, and what the stakes are, it's hard to know exactly how I'd play it in BW, which I think might be of interest (maybe just to me).  But more importantly, and I apologize for hitting this point again but it's so important: dice rolls in BW aren't determining what characters feel, only whether they're achieving their intent.  Even the Steel roll to commit murder in cold blood isn't determining whether the character wants to murder someone in cold blood, only whether they can at that moment.  Regarding your last point, I'd point back to the compromise results in Si Juk Pt 4, bearing in mind the limits of APs -- the narration and descriptions do influence the fiction and results and should influence the outcome of the encounter in the fiction.  If they're not, I'd argue that the play is dysfunctional for BW.</blockquote>

Verification