Contested Ground Studios

[Malcolm]

Conflict Resolution

There are times in games of Hot War when the PCs will have differing goals from NPCs or maybe even from each other. When this situation arises, then the mechanics presented here are used to resolve those conflicts, to see who is successful and what the consequences of success or failure are.

What is a conflict?

In the most basic of terms, a conflict is the situation described above. Two or more individuals or groups have differing goals which need to be resolved for the story to move along. A conflict does not have to be one that involves violence, it simply must be a meaningful situation where both sides seek different outcomes.

The most important word in the above paragraph is meaningful. Conflicts should never be about trivial things, rather they should seek to advance the story, evolve the characters or both of these at the same time. In the majority of circumstances, it will be obvious if something is worthy of being called a conflict and the dice should be broken out.

Conflicts are also situations where something is being risked. In game terms, this means attributes, traits and relationships. By bringing these into a conflict, they are being put at risk of change. Change can be positive or negative, depending on the outcome of the conflict. However, when a conflict takes place, characters will always change as a result of it.

Examples:

The following is NOT considered a conflict:

Neames and Beaumont are arguing over whether to take rifles or sub-machineguns out on a patrol.

Although this is something that the characters are arguing over, it isn't meaningful as it has notreal influence on the story at hand. The choice of weapons and who gets to decide what they are isn't important enough to warrant a conflict. There is nothing being risked, nothing is really at stake.

The following IS considered a conflict:

Neames and Beaumont are arguing over the fate of an Army deserter they have come across in the course of their duties. Neames thinks he should be handed over to the military so that they can ingratiate themselves with the Army and wheedle information out of senior officers. Beaumont knows the man will probably be shot or sent to a punishment battalion and thinks he should be let go.

This is a meaningful conflict. It involves a decision regarding the fate of an individual and highlights the differing views and attitudes of the two characters. There are also risks for the characters, risks that exist for both sides.

If there is doubt over whether a situation is a conflict or not, the ultimate arbiter is the GM. She gets to make the final call on whether a situation warrants use of conflict resolution and everyone round the table should respect the decision. Open debate prior to this is encouraged (even mandated) and everyone should feel free to voice their opinion in a reasonable manner. However, the discussion should not be allowed to drag on for more than a couple of minutes. If it threatens to derail the game, the GM should make a call and this call should be respected. A perceived bad call by the GM can be discussed in greater detail after the game.

Before any dice are rolled, it should be clear as to what the conflict is about. This does not mean that the sides involved must state explicitly what they want, that would be akin to pre-judging the outcome. There should be consensus about what the conflict relates to, what it is about and what the risks might be.

Only when the dice are rolled and the outcome known, will we see who has become the victor and what the actual outcome will be. Do not try to tell the story of the outcome prior to the dice being rolled.

Example:

Stephen, still acting as GM, has framed a scene, outlining that Neames, Beaumont and Watson have been stopped in a dimly lit, filthy backstreet in Shoreditch by an armed Army officer who is quite obviously on the make. The officer wants to arrest them for behaving in an extremely suspicious manner in order to take them back to HQ and nick their ration cards and valuables.

Stephen is playing the officer as very aggressive and antagonistic and everyone has agreed that there is definitely a conflict. Joe has decided that Neames will not be taking part in the conflict and will be standing back, looking on in worry at the potentially explosive argument. Caroline has stated that Beaumont is in full argument mode and really wants to get involved in the conflict. Debbie has decided that Watson isn't getting involved and is some way down the street, keeping lookout.

The Conflict Arena

An arena for conflict essentially decides what means will be used to resolve the situation. There are three arenas, each of which relate to an attribute possessed by PCs and NPCs. The arenas are as follows:

Physical - This means that Action will form the basis for the dice pool

Mental - This means that Insight will form the basis for the dice pool

Social - This means that Influence will form the basis for the dice pool

Which arena the conflict takes place in should be pretty obvious from the outset, although there should be room to debate and discuss, albeit briefly. It might be the case that someone will argue in favour of an arena where their character is stronger, which is not an unreasonable position to take. However, the arena used should be appropriate to what is going on, what has already been played out in the scene and what the goals are.

Example:

Now group has to decide the arena for the conflict. Debbie suggests that physical presence might be getting used to try and influence things: therefore, the Physical arena should be used. Caroline and Stephen disagree, both saying that the conflict should still remain in the Social arena, using Influence. Debbie sees the logic in this and the group agree that the conflict will use Influence.

Creating a Dice Pool

Once the reasons for the conflict have been decided and the arena for the conflict worked out, everyone involved works to create the pool of dice they will roll to determine the outcome. Creating a pool follows a few stages that need some explanation. But, once you've created a pool a couple of times, it is a very quick and intuitive process.

The basic platform upon which all pools are built is a single attribute, determined by the conflict arena. As mentioned above, physical conflicts use Action, mental conflicts use Insight and social conflicts use Influence.

Each person involved in the conflict should pick up a number of dice equal to the attribute being used.

If the GM does not have a set of details created for NPCs in a given situation, then there a few guidelines for the number of dice to roll in off the cuff situations:

If the opposition (either an individual or a group) are incompetent, idiotic, cowed or otherwise not very capable, then the GM should simply pick up a pool of three dice.

If the opposition are reasonably competent, experienced in such situations or presents a moderately stern challenge, then the GM should simply pick up a pool of five dice.

If the opposition are very competent, experienced, unafraid of the PCs or have some form of advantage in the situation, then the GM should pick up a pool of seven dice.

If the opposition present a very serious challenge to the PCs, have wide ranging experience in the situation, are confident or otherwise highly capable, then the GM should pick up a pool of nine dice.

Example:

Caroline picks up four dice, representing Beaumont's Influence of four. Stephen has created some NPC information about the Army officer (see pg.XX for more on creating NPCs) and picks up three dice, representing an Influence of three).

Bringing in Hidden Agendas

The next stage in creating the dice pool is to determine if hidden agendas can be brought into play. Using a hidden agenda makes a powerful statement about the conflict: it says that this conflict is very meaningful for the character and could advance (or retard) the agenda in a significant way. Because a hidden agenda can only be used a certain amount of times before it reaches a point of resolution, bringing one into play should be considered seriously. The GM frames scene that can challenge hidden agendas, but players should not feel that they must use them every time it might be appropriate. Deciding on when to use hidden agendas helps to pace the game.

Hidden agendas should not simply be brought in to a conflict only to gain a mechanical advantage. They are powerful features and significant elements of a character's make-up and they should be treated as such

If a hidden agenda is brought into play, then it adds a number of dice appropriate to its rating. So, if a player is bringing in an agenda rated at nine, they get to add 2 dice to their pool.

Example:

Stephen knows that the officer has no hidden agenda in the situation outlined above, so makes no changes to his dice pool for the moment. On the other hand, Caroline looks at the hidden agendas she has created for Beaumont and thinks that his factional agenda "Find gullible individuals in the Army and turn them into moles to increase Navy influence and knowledge." might be appropriate here. This officer, while a pretty low level type, could be a useful route into the Army command structure. She decides to bring Beaumont's factional hidden agenda into play and therefore gets to add 3 dice to the pool.

The dice pools currently look like this:

Stephen (GM): 3
Caroline (Beaumont): 7

In this conflict, Beaumont already has a big advantage due to the fact that Caroline chose to bring in a hidden agenda.

It should be noted that only one hidden agenda per character can be brought into play in any one conflict. Even if a character has two hidden agendas that might be appropriate, only one can ever be brought in to the conflict. In addition, as soon as a hidden agenda is brought into the conflict, one of the boxes on the character sheet representing hidden agenda usage must be crossed off.

Another important factor is that, especially in the case of factional hidden agendas, the character may want to fight against what they have been ordered to do.

Bringing in Traits

When Traits are brought in to a conflict, they add one die each. So, if a player chooses to use two of their characters traits, then they get to add two dice to their pool. Trait use must follow one very important rule: Any trait brought in to the conflict should be APPROPRIATE.

Bringing traits into a conflict which only have the most tenuous of links to the situation at hand is frowned upon and discouraged. If such 'trait whoring' is seen to happen at the table, then the other participants are at liberty to raise the issue. Once the appropriateness of a trait has been raised, if two or more participants agree that it is inappropriate, then the trait cannot be used in this conflict.

And, just as the trait use itself must be appropriate, then objections to the use of a trait must also be appropriate and reasonable.

Bringing a trait into a conflict means that it will be put at risk. In essence, this means that the trait could be changed as the result of conflict consequences. Winning the conflict means that the trait could be changed in a positive way. Losing the conflict means that the trait could be changed in a negative way. The only situation where a trait could be brought in and not fundamentally changed in this manner is if the trait is 'locked' which means it can be used without fear of change. Traits can only be locked as the result of consequences (see pg.XX). The only consequence that can applied applied to a locked trait is 'unlocking'. PCs do not start the game with any locked traits.

Both positive and negative traits add a die to the pool, but they are handled in slightly different ways. Any dice for negative traits should use a die that is easily recognisable. So, if all the dice in the pool are black, then a negative trait die should be white or some other light colour. Using a negative trait in a conflict still gives you an advantage like a positive trait, but it can have negative outcomes for the character. This is discussed in full on page XX.

Example:

Stephen looks at his pre-generated NPC notes for the Army chap and browses his Traits. Only one of them seems appropriate for the moment, and it is: "Dedicated to getting rich". Everyone round the table agrees that this is a reasonable trait to bring into play on the part of the NPC.

Caroline takes a look through the traits that she created for Beaumont and decides to bring in the positive trait of "Charming and highly likeable" and the negative trait of "His temper can sometimes get the better of him". Debbie speaks up, voicing the opinion that these traits seem somewhat mutually exclusive and questions whether some Army type would really be susceptible to Beaumont's charm? Stephen agrees with this, so Caroline decides to use just the negative trait.

The dice pools currently look like this:

Stephen (GM): 4
Caroline (Beaumont): 8

Bringing in Relationships

The next stage in assembling a dice pool is to bring in any relationships that might be appropriate to the situation. Relationships can only be brought in if they have a direct impact on the situation or if the conflict at hand will influence the relationship. Positive relationships give a bonus to dice pools if they are being used to support, empower or help someone, or to strengthen the bonds of that existing relationship. Negative relationships give a bonus to dice pools if they are being used to harm, disempower or bully, or if there is an attempt to make the relationship less negative.

Bringing a relationship into a conflict also puts it at risk. In the same manner as traits, the relationship is subject to consequences from the conflict, in either a positive or negative fashion.

Relationships can be used by either side in a conflict, but subject to the following rules:

With a positive relationship, the owner of the relationship always gets first option on using the relationship UNLESS the conflict is with the object of the relationship. If the side with first choice does not choose to use the relationship, then other participants in the conflict may use it.

Example:

Neames has collared Watson, who is on his way to an assignation with a local girl. Debbie decides that she will initiate a conflict, representing the fact that Neames is trying to stop Watson. Joe assembles his dice pool, but choose not to bring in his relationship with Mary Pike, the girl Watson hopes to marry. Debbie decides that she will bring in Watsons positive relationship with Mary Pike. This represents Neames using the relationship to persuade Watson not to jeopardise his chances just to get a one night stand.

With a negative relationship, participants other than the owner of the relationship always get first option on using the relationship UNLESS the conflict is with the object of the relationship. If the side with first choice does not choose to use the relationship, then other participants in the conflict may use it.

Example:

Beaumont is having a set-to with Morely, a bullying work-gang leader who he has built uo a sizeable negative relationship with. Stephen, playing the role of Morely, would get the choice of using this negative trait under normal circumstances. But, as the conflict is with the object of the relationship, Caroline can decide whether or not to use it to aid Beaumonts chance of beating Morely up. She decides to use the relationship, using the anger and resentment represented by the negative relationship.

A relationship can only be used once in a conflict, regardless of who actually used it and there must be valid, appropriate reasons for using relationships.

Example:

The players involved in the ongoing conflict discuss whether or not relationships are going to come in to play. Looking at the various relationships that Beaumont has, Caroline suspects she might be able to use the relationship that Beaumont has with Vice-Admiral Newcastle, bring his name into things and threatening dire retribution from the highest ranks of the Navy! This gives an additional 3 dice to the pool.However, if things go wrong, then bringing in this relationships means that it is being put at risk.

At this stage, the dice pools look like this:

Stephen (GM): 4
Caroline (Beaumont): 11

Other Factors

The final stage in creating a dice pool is to take into account social, environmental or physical factors that could influence the outcome of the conflict. Everyone round the table who is not taking part in the conflict is allowed to add or subtract one die from the pool of any participant. In order to do this, they must state a factor that is affecting the situation and why it is affecting the individual they have chosen to aid or hinder.

The addition or subtraction of dice by other people round the table is an important indicator of how they would like to see the story go, whether the GM has set the difficulty level appropriately and reinforces the tone, genre or drama.

Example:

Neither Watson nor Neames are involved in the conflict, so Joe and Debbie have the option to add or subtract a die each from the pool of a participant. Joe thinks that the officer deserves a bit more of a chance and opts to give a die to that pool. He states that there is a patrol of soldiers at the far end of the street, giving the officer extra confidence. Debbie takes this idea and states that Beaumont has also notied the soldiers out of the corner of his eye, seeing that one of them has started to walk toards the group. She takes a die away from Carolines pool.

At this stage, the dice pools look like this:

Stephen (GM): 5
Caroline (Beaumont): 10

Synopsis of Dice Pool Creation

1. Acknowledge that there is a conflict taking place and that dice should be rolled.
2. Decide if the conflict falls into the Physical (Action), Mental (Insight) or Social (Influence) arena.
3. Pick up a number of dice equal to the attribute being used.
4. Decide if any Hidden Agendas are being brought into play.
5. Decide if any traits can be brought into the conflict.
6. Can relationships be brought into the conflict?
7. Everyone not involved in the conflict can either add or subtract one die from one pool.

Now it is time to roll the dice!


Rolling The Dice

When goals have been set and the dice pools created, it is to actually roll the dice and determine the outcomes. Who will succeed? Who will fail? How will it affect the story? How will it affect the characters involved?

Each participant should take the pool of dice they have created and roll them. Make sure each pool is kept separate from other pools. Do not get the dice all mixed up!

So how does this work? Everyone rolls their dice and looks to see who has rolled the highest number. In order to gain victory you must roll higher numbers than the numbers rolled by the opposition. The more dice that are higher than an opponents number, the better. The amount of higher dice is known as the level of success (see pg.XX).

If both sides have rolled the same highest number, look to see if one side has more of that number than the other side. Remove dice of the same number on a one for one basis until only one side is left with any of that particular number. So, if Allison rolled 2, 4, 7, 10, 10, 10 and John rolled 4, 5, 6, 6, 10, then one 10 from each side would be removed, leaving the dice looking like this: Allison: 2, 4, 7, 10, 10 and John: 4, 5, 6, 6. Allison would therefore have three dice higher than John, making her the winner with a level of success of three.

Example:

Stephen and Caroline roll their dice pools and come up with the following results:

Stephen (GM): 1, 2, 2, 4, 4
Caroline (Beaumont): 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9

The highest number gained for the officer is 4, whereas Caroline rolled a 9. Caroline rolled a rather impressive five dice higher than the highest result for the officer. Caroline is the victor in this situation.

Interpreting the Dice

As previously mentioned, in order to achieve your goal, you are looking to get dice which are higher than the highest number rolled by the opposition. If there are more than two participants involved in the conflict, more than one character might gain success but only one character can be termed the victor.

Example:

Because Caroline rolled five dice higher than Stephens 4 she is successful and is termed the victor. She will receive additional rewards.

Once the victor is determined, it is important to note their level of success because it will help determine the consequences that result from the conflict.

Example:

Caroline got five successes in her roll against the officers. This translates to five 'points' that can be spent on consequences.

Consequences

Consequences arise from success or failure and are used to change and develop characters.

To determine how many points can be spent on consequences, look at the level of success. The winning participants may then apply a number of points equal to their level of success.

The number of successes gained equate to points that can be spent on positive consequences for those who were successful, negative consequences for those on the losing side or a combination of the two. It is not just the victor (the participant with the greatest number of successes) who gets to decide what the consequences are. Everyone who was successful can spend their points on buying positive consequences for their own characters or can spend points buying failure consequences for those on the losing side.

Obviously, consequences must logically stem from what happened in the conflict and what the various sides were attempting to achieve. Both players and GMs are bound by this rule and all participants around the table should feel free to speak up if they feel that the consequence system is being abused for advantage or misused in any way.

Consequences are chosen from the table below.

Points Cost: 1
Positive Consequences

Change a negative trait to a positive trait

Lock a trait

Gain a new positive relationship at 1

Increase a positive relationship or reduce a negative relationship by 1

Negative Consequences

Change a positive trait to a negative trait

Gain a negative trait for this scene only

Gain a new negative relationship at 1

Unlock a trait

Reduce a positive relationship or increase a negative relationship by 1

Points Cost: 2

Positive Consequences

Increase an attribute by 1

Gain a new positive trait

Lose a negative trait

Negative Consequences

Decrease an attribute by 1

Gain a new negative trait

Lose a positive trait

Points Cost: 3

Positive Consequences

Reduce a negative relationship to zero

Negative Consequences

Reduce an attribute to zero

Reduce a positive relationship to zero


Definitions of Consequences

Increase/decrease an attribute by 1: The attribute that was used in the conflict can be permanently increased or decreased by one point. The maximum level that any attribute can be increased to is five and an attribute can not be permanently increased by more than one point.

Gain a new positive/negative trait: A new positive or negative trait, appropriate to what happened in the conflict, can be added to the character sheet. A character may only have a maximum of nine traits in total at any one time.

Gain a negative trait for this scene only: This trait is temporary and only lasts until the end of this scene, when it is removed.

Lose a positive/negative trait: An unlocked positive or negative trait that was used in the conflict must be removed from the character sheet.

Lock a positive/negative trait: Locking a trait means that it can be used in a conflict without potentially being deleted or flipped as a result of consequences.

Unlock a positive/negative trait: Unlocking a trait means that it can be affected by the results of a conflict and can potentially be deleted or flipped as a result of consequences.

Reduce an attribute to zero: The attribute that was used in the conflict must immediately be reduced to a level of zero. This will trigger a crisis point (see below).

Change a positive/negative trait: An unlocked positive trait will be made negative and vice versa

Gain a new relationship: A new relationship at level 1 can be added.

Increase/decrease a relationship: Arelationship that has been brought in to the conflict may be increased or decreased in level.

Example:

As Beaumont was successful in the conflict, Caroline gets to decide the consequences for both sides. This means that she can assign 5 points worth of consequences (because her level of success was 5) chosen from the table above.

She decides to assign positive consequences first and chooses to change the negative trait "His temper sometimes gets the better of him" to a positive trait, taking 2 of her points.

Moving on to the officer, Caroline looks at the failure consequences and decides to spend her 3 remaining points on reducing the officers Influence by 1. This uses the final 3 points.

Telling the Story of The Conflict

At the end of each conflict resolution, there comes a period when the story of what has happened needs to be told. The duty of telling this story falls to the participant who was the victor in the conflict. Alternatively, the victor can nominate another person round the table to tell the story. Remember, the victor is the person with the greatest level of success at the end of conflict resolution.

The victor should describe the outcome of the conflict, taking into account the conflict arena, the traits and the relationships that were brought in to play. However, just because the victor has narration rights at the end of a conflict does not mean that others round the table cannot contribute.

The victor is encouraged to ask others to add to the description of the outcome, perhaps adding in little bits of colour regarding their own characters, but the victor is the 'gatekeeper' of what is established through narration. Everyone round the table has the right to contribute, but the victor is the final arbiter of what is included, what detail is added and whose characters' actions are featured in the narration.

There are areas where, if the victor is a player, rather than the GM, they must tread carefully. They should not make statements of fact about things that they may have found or discovered as part of the conflict.

Example:

A player may not narrate the following: "...and the briefcase contains the secret plans that show us exactly where the hidden bunker is."

However, they are totally at liberty to narrate the following: "...and the briefcase contains sheaves of papers and a couple of tatty manila folders."

The example above tells the GM that the players thinks the information they were trying to find is contained in these papers. At this point, the GM should be as forthcoming as possible and react to what the player obviously wants from the situation. If the conflict was all about getting this important piece of information, then not giving it to the players invalidates the entire thing. However, it is the GM who gets to say exactly what the information is.

Players are not allowed to make statements of fact about NPCs the GM has brought into the scene. On the flip side of this, the GM must never make statements of fact about the PCs. Only the player can make a decision about his or her character and what they are like, what they feel and what they are doing.

Example:

A player may not narrate the following: "...and the strange man in the black coat is an undercover Soviet agent who is wanted by the Army for assassinating several of their officers"

However, the may narrate the following: "...and the strange man in the black coat obviously had something sinister to hide, which he reveals to us, as we really wanted to find out what the hell he was doing."

In the example, the player is saying "I want to know something sinister about this man" which the GM should respect and reveal information about the man. Maybe he was a secret agent. Maybe he was up to something else?

The GM being forbidden from making statements of fact about PCs is covered in this example:

Example:

The GM may not narrate the following: "...and accidentally shooting the small boy who was with the black marketeer causes you to feel immense grief for the next week."

The GM may narrate the following, though: "...and one of your bullets accidentally hits the small boy who was with the black marketeer, grievously wounding him. How does this make you feel?"

Crisis Points

Whenever an attribute reaches zero for a PC or an NPC, this triggers a crisis point. Attributes can reach zero through a series of consequences or through a major failure where consequences immediately drop the attribute to zero.

The nature of the crisis point differs according to the attribute that has been reduced.

When Action reaches zero, this means that the PC or NPC has suffered serious physical trauma, injury or perhaps even death.

When Influence reaches zero, this means that the PC or NPC has tipped over the edge into madness, catatonia, has lost their social abilities, willpower or some other serious mental injury.

When Insight reaches zero, this means that the PC or NPC has lost their reasoning ability, their intelligence or knowledge or has been pushed to a state of extreme confusion and self-doubt.

When a PC or NPC reaches a crisis point, the choices open to their player depend on the nature of the crisis point. Action hitting zero may well indicate that the character has died as a result of violence meted out during a conflict. In the case of PCs, there is always the possibility to retire the character. If the character is to be retired, then the very next scene should take the form of an epilogue for the character. This epilogue is totally under the control of the player whose character has suffered the crisis. They should tell the story of how the characters career with the SSG ended in an appropriate fashion.

It might be the case that a player does not feel that the character is quite ready to be retired, that they have more to offer to the ongoing story. This is perfectly acceptable, but there are a few rules to follow.

Characters who have hit a crisis point can take no further active part in conflicts (for the moment). The player can still talk about what their character is doing in scenes, but the character cannot act.

The character must have a scene, in the near future, where their crisis is resolved. This scene is entirely up to the player and could involve hospital treatment for a seriously injured character, psychiatric help for a character who has been pushed over the brink of madness or the character, their brains scrambled and their wits scattered, lock themselves away with their books and papers for an extended period of time trying to unscramble their brains.

If the player chooses to have the character return, the attribute that was at zero can be brought up to half (rounding down, with a minimum of one) its original level.

The character must also lose a positive trait that was used in the conflict that precipitated the crisis point. If no positive traits were used by the character, then choose one which is most appropriate to what happened in the conflict. Lastly, the character must gain a negative trait related to their crisis point and the situation that precipitated it.

Example:

During a particularly violent scene in the tunnels of the London Underground, Neames was seriously injured and had his Action reduced to zero, necessitating a crisis point scene. Joe decided to let the other players engage in a following to the scene in the underground before having the crisis point scene.

When his turn comes, Joe says that the scene takes place in a grimey, worn down apartment in Central London that the SSG use for injured members. He colours the scene with the groans of the injured and introduces Dr Farrell, a former paediatrician who now works for the SSG. The doctor attends to neames with care and consideration, obviously frustrated at the lack of supplies and the poor conditions that hinder her work in healing the injured.

Joe decides to remove the positive trait "This is where I grew up", because Neames no longer feels confident that he understands London and its people. To replace it, Joe comes up with the negative trait "The tunnels terrify me". he also now returns Neames' Action to half of the original level, which puts it at one.

The scene is concluded with Neames hobbling from the makeshift wad, still injured and needing attention, but determined to rejoin his brothers in arms. Dr Farrell watches from the stairs, shaking her head. Perhaps we may meet her again in the future?

NPCs And Crisis Points

Obviously, Hot War is about the stories of the PCs and NPCs are secondary to those stories. NPCs (see pg.XX) will not have crisis point scenes. NPCs (see pg.XX) take consequences in exactly the same fashion as PCs.

Apply consequences for both success and failure to an NPC as would be the case for a PC. If they have attributes reduced to zero, then the following guidelines apply:

Action: The NPC is killed or otherwise mortally wounded, seriously injured, disabled or some other appropriate physical outcome.

Influence: The NPC is driven insane, comes under the thrall of the PCs, loses any sense of purpose or self, has their willpower destroyed or some other appropriate outcome.

Insight: The intelligence and knowledge of the NPC is obliterated, scattered or given up wholly to the PCs, perhaps through interrogation or intimidation.

Example:



Additional Rules

Conflicts With Multiple Participants

There will sometimes be occasions when PCs actively want to work together to have a better chance of succeeding at a single goal or multiple people may be involved in the same conflict. In the first case, if it is agreed that two or more PCs are working together and they have a common goal, they can add their dice pools together. This, however, is subject to a few additional rules.

One PC must be designated as the 'acting' character. This character can bring in attributes, traits (both positive and negative), hidden agendas and trust to their pool. All other PCs taking part in the conflict are designated 'supporting' characters and they can add to the pool with their attributes and traits. They may not, however, bring their own hidden agendas into the situation. They are permitted to bring Tools into the situation, subject to the normal rules about appropriateness.

All participants may be subject to consequences as part of the outcome of the conflict. In the case of victory, it is the player of the acting character who has authority over the assignment of consequences.

Example:

Beaumont, Neames and Watson are faced with the terrifying form of a rogue Soviet Servitor as they sneak through the ruined lanes of Shoreditch. This pulverising wave of blackness threatens to engulf and kill them all. Caroline suggests that they co-operate against the monster in order to have a better chance of defeating it. Joe and Debbie agree to this plan.

Beaumont is desegnated the acting character, which makes Neames and Watson the supporting characters. Beaumont has an Action of 3 and Caroline adds to the pool two appropriate traits. Watson also has an Action of 3, but no traits that are seen as appropriate, so Debbie gives Caroline three dice. Neames has an Action of 2 and Joe brings in two appropriate traits. So, he gives Caroline 4 dice.

Working as a group, the PCs now have a pool of 12 dice to roll against the servitor.

The PCs win against the monster and Caroline is in charge of assigning the consequences and controlling the story of what happened.

However, there may also be times when there are multiple particpants in a conflict, with no co-operation between the sides. If this is the case, the victor is the defined as the particpant who gets the best result on the dice out of everyone involved.

Once the victor has been decided, the level of success (and therefore the number of consequence points that can be allocated) is determined by deciding who the victor was in adversity with and seeing how many successes they had against them. If the victor was in adversity with more than one particpant, then the number of successes is determined by seeing which adversary they were most successful against.

The victor then has the right to tell the story of what happened in the conflict and spend consequence points as they see fit.

Example:

Beaumont, Neames and Watson are all having a raging argument, which also involves Mary, Watsons wife-to-be. All four participants want different things, but not all of them are in adversity with each other.

Everyone grabs dice pools to roll in order to resolve the conflict. The dice turn out like this:

Caroline (Beaumont): 3, 5, 7, 9, 10
Debbie (Neames): 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9
Joe (Watson): 2, 3, 3, 4, 7, 7, 10
Steve (GM, playing Mary): 1, 5, 5, 5, 6

Caroline is the victor in situation. She and Joe both had 10s as their highest number, but removing those, Caroline had a 9, where Joe only had a 7, so Caroline wins.

Beaumont was in adversity with both Mary and Neames. Looking at the dice, this shows that 1 success was acheived against Neames but 3 successes were acheived against Mary. Therefore, Caroline has 3 points to spend on consequences as a result of the conflict.


Bringing Tools Into Conflicts

Sometimes, a character, whether that be a PC or an NPC, will bring a tool into a conflict. A tool can be a weapon, a document, a person, a photograph or any one of thousands of possibilities. If someone does bring one of these tools into the conflict, they can claim a bonus of two dice to their pool. However, there are a few restrictions:

Any tool must be appropriate, reasonable and have a discernible impact on the conflict. In addition, only one tool can be brought into a conflict by one character.

Anyone in the group can exercise veto on things being brought in to a conflict, even on things that the GM bring in on behalf of her NPCs. Once someone raises doubt about the effectiveness and appropriateness of the tool, it requires another participant to agree in order for the veto to be enacted.

Examples:

Watson is trying to intimidate an SSG clerk into handing over some significant information. Debbie says that she would like to bring a tool into play, and states that as part of the intimidation, Watson has drawn his silenced pistol and laid it casually on the desk, in full view of the clerk. Everyone agrees that this is appropriate, reasonable and would have a discernible impact on the conflict, so Debbie gets to add another two dice to her pool.

Beaumont is in conflict with an RAF officer who has him pinned against a wall, threatening to strangle him. Caroline says that Beaumont fumbles a picture of his children from his wallet and attempts to use it in his efforts to win over the thug. Joe pipes up that he doesn't really think that the photo would have much on an impact on an officer brutalised by the effects of war. Stephen agrees with this, so the use of the photo is vetoed and Caroline does not gain the two bonus dice for bringing in a tool.

When a tool has been brought into a conflict for the first time, make a note of it in the tools section of the character sheet or NPC record for future reference.

The Role of Negative Traits

On page XX we looked at how to assemble a dice pool and mentioned that bringing in a negative Trait requires that you use a distinctively coloured die. If the die (or dice) representing a negative Trait (or Traits) ends up as the highest number in the pool, then something bad related to that negative Trait will take place. This happens even in the event of a success.

In addition, if both sides (or more, if there are multiple participants) are using negative Traits and the negative Trait dice come up as the highest numbers, then both sides have something bad associated with those Traits happen to them. Obviously, Traits only affect those characters who brought them in to the conflict.

Example:

Watson is involved in a conflict and Debbie chooses to bring in the negative trait "Doesn't think things through" to get an additional die in her pool. The conflict is based on Insight and takes place during a long scene where Watson is attempting to tail what he thinks is a Soviet officer through the backstreets of London.

When the dice are rolled, Watson wins the conflict. However, the highest number rolled was a 10 and this came up on the die that represented the negative trait. This means that although watson has succeeded in tracking the Soviet officer successfully, something has gone awry durig the process.

Debbie thinks on this and suggests that although the tail was successful and Watson has discovered the safehouse where the officer is living, this has led poor Watson into the territory of a particularly violent local gang. He only realises this when he sees warning signs against strangers plastered on the dirty walls. Then he starts worrying.

Resolving Hidden Agendas

As the game progresses and Hidden Agendas get used in various scenes, there will be an obvious progression towards the resolution of the agendas, for good or for ill. The rating of a hidden agenda denotes how many conflicts the agenda can be brought in to before it MUST be resolved. A rating of five indicates that it can be used in five conflicts before it must be resolved, a rating of nine indicates that it can be used in nine conflicts before it must be resolved and so on.

Each character sheet has spaces for noting a character's hidden agendas, the rating of the agenda and whether or not the use of an agenda was successful in a particular instance. Each time an agenda is used, one box should either have a plus ('+') or minus ('-') symbol written in to it. A plus symbol indicates that the agenda was used in a conflict where the character succeeded, while a minus symbol indicates that the agenda was used in a conflict where the character failed.

Once a number of boxes equal to the rating of the hidden agenda have been filled, the agenda has reached a resolution point. If the majority of the boxes have plus symbols in them, then the agenda can be resolved successfully. If the majority of the boxes have minus symbols in them, then the agenda will be resolved unsuccessfully. One important thing to note is that a successful resolution may not be desirable, particularly in the case of factional agendas. Perhaps the character totally disagrees with the strictures that the agenda has placed upon them, maybe their views on the faction have changed over time?

In a subsequent scene (though not necessarily the most immediate scene) this player has the authority to frame a scene. See pg.XX for more on scenes and scene framing. The scene should be something of an epilogue for the agenda: how does it finally work out, who is involved, what are the repercussions?

In the case of resolving an agenda positively, each negative against the agenda represents a complication to its resolution. These complications can be introduced in to the narrative by other people at the table. Participants should take turns to introduce complications and the players who is resolving the agenda should have the chance to incorporate them into the narrative.

In the case of resolving an agenda negatively, each positive against the agenda represents something good that come sout of it. Just like negatives, these good things are introduced, one at a time, by other participants. Once the resolution scene has taken place, then play can revert back to normal.

Now, the player must remove the hidden agenda from their character sheet. It has been resolved and no longer plays a major part in the characters life. In the case of a factional hidden agenda, the player may now choose to receive a new hidden agenda from whatever group or organisation they report to. This can be a follow-on from the previous agenda, something entirely new, something that has been inspired by events in the game and so on. In the case of a new personal hidden agenda, it must be inspired by something that has taken place within the story so far.

When picking a new agenda, it must be of a different rating than the one it is replacing. So, if a personal hidden agenda rated at nine has just been resolved, the new personal hidden agenda must be either a three or a five. Only when an agenda has cycled through the three different ratings are things reset and the player is free to choose any level for a new hidden agenda.

Example:

During character creation, Debbie chose the personal hidden agenda of 'Get Mary Pike to marry me' for Watson. The agenda had a rating of 3. During the course of the game, the agenda gets used in three conflicts. Two of these represent success for Watson, but one conflict was a failure. The agenda has now reached its rating and must be resolved.

Debbie chooses to wait for a couple of scenes to alow the flow of play to continue, then asks for the resolution scene. She frames the scene saying it takes place outside of an abandoned underground station where Mary, her family and many other people now live. Watson takes her by the hand and halting asks if she will marry him if he can find a vicar who will perform the ceremony. Because the majority of uses of th agenda were successes, then Mary is going to say yes. However, there was a failure, which allows someone else round the table to bring in a complication for the situation.

Joe pipes up and suggests that although Mary and Watson are now engaged to be married, but that Mary's mother is dead set against it. She is appalled that her daughter is marrying a no-good ruffian like Watson and she will do everything in her power to ruin the marriage. However, what actually happens could be revealed in future games.

Debbie must now choose a new personal hidden agenda to replace the old one. The complication has given her an idea and choose the simple agenda of 'I want Mary's family to accept me', rated at 5.
_________________
The worn sprocket on the singlespeed hub of CGS

"If the concrete and the clay beneath your feet
Don't get you son
The avenues and alleyways are gonna do it
Just for fun"