Clarify failure for me

[Stormtower]

I don't have the rulebook (yet) ... but from what I've read on these forums, here's my understanding.

Sample scenario: The players are looking for a secret door.
The obstacle and test: searching for the door.

Possible outcome 1: Search check succeeds. The players find the door.

Possible outcome 2: Search check fails. But the GM can't just say "oh well, you needed to find that door to get into the dungeon. Too bad. See you next week." So ... he puts in a "twist": An enemy team comes up -- maybe they reveal the door, or after overcoming the enemy team, the players find a map of where the door is.

Possible outcome 3: Search check fails... but that's because they didn't find the trap. The trap goes off ... in other words, a condition is applied to the players.


And really, this set of outcomes is not unique to Mouse Guard. A similar set can be used in D&D, and just about any RPG.

There is, of course, a 4th outcome:

Possible outcome 4: Search check fails ... the players also fail the followup twist, and perhaps the twist after that. They fail so badly, that they fail the entire mission. Friendly GMs would say "your patrol is left in the wilderness for dead, and you are rescued back to town by the follow-up patrol that Gwen sends after you." Cutthroat GMs would say, "you guys died. Hmmm, we still have two more hours of gaming to go ... wanna make new characters?"


So, I would have to say that there is a possibility that the players really, really, fail ... and the game can come to an abrupt end. But for the most part, they simply have to "pay" the costs of failure ... and the game goes on.

[ThisIsVictor]

I went to grab my MG book on the self and grabbed the comic instead. That was confusing.

Looking at page 91. . . If a failed rolled leads to a twist, the players must deal with the twist. After the twist is over, the GM either puts up another obstacle or allows the players to complete their mission. (Arrive at the town, etc.)

On the other hand, conditions explicitly say "He gets what he wants but you get to give him a condition."

I would say you're correct. I'm glad you asked, before hand I would have answered the other way. That also makes playing from twist to twist make a whole lot more sense!

--Victor

[luke]

While I appreciate the answers thus far, I think a basic part of this rule is being overlooked. It is possible that the original goal is never completed. The twists can keep spinning the story further and further away until such a point is reached in which resumption is nonsensical.

You can and should go from twist to twist to twist to twist, etc. Twists are new situations, once presented the players might not even want to go back to their original goal.

That's on page 91, second column first paragraph.

-L

[Stormtower]

Hmmm .... so it's like a recursive function ...

Function PlayersPerformTest(checkSkill)
... check succeeds ... players get their intended goal; return achievedGoal
... check fails ...
....... GM imposes a condition, and players get their intended goal; return achievedGoal
....... GM does a twist; return (call PlayersPerformTest(newTwist))
....... players fail; return failedGoal
....... players spin out of control; return (call NewStory())

[ThisIsVictor]

Luke - Thanks! I just had an aha moment and failure in MG clicked. Playing from twist to twist sounds really really fun. I might have to put the BW one shot I'm planing on hold and break out MG again.

--Victor

[Aramis]

Essentially, the mission failure conditions are "Give Up" or "lose a conflict", and the twists taking away so far that going back is a form of Give Up....

That being said, since almost any obstacle can be made into a conflict, the GM has a lot of power to put failure on the line, and in some seriously surprising ways.

Any A intent vs B intent roll can be either a quick-roll contest or dragged out into a conflict.

Make it from Lockhaven through the snow in winter, with winter's intent to Injure the PC's... can be handled as a single roll of Pathfinder vs Winter (8).... or as an extended conflict, with Attack being Pathfinder, defend being survivalist, Feint being Loremouse or Pathfinder, and Maneuver being survivalist or Loremouse. Winter simply rolls nature for each... Party Dispo is base Health, plus roll of Pathfinder. Winter is Nature + Roll of Nature.

If taken as an extended conflict, it's quite possible to lose, and accept 'we don't make it to lockhaven, and instead hole up with a squirrel for a month' instead of injury...

[sirogit]

I would emphasize that while any action that results in a Twist-Fail is definitely failed, the challenge that created it is rendered irrelevant, at least as far as this mission goes:

Eg:

Mice failed in a roll to find food to calm the nerves of a village? That might be a Twist involving conflict with surly mice. But after that conflict, the story doesn't go back to finding food for mice, the GM has to present a new challenge.

[buzz]

While I appreciate the answers thus far, I think a basic part of this rule is being overlooked. It is possible that the original goal is never completed. The twists can keep spinning the story further and further away until such a point is reached in which resumption is nonsensical.

You can and should go from twist to twist to twist to twist, etc. Twists are new situations, once presented the players might not even want to go back to their original goal.

That's on page 91, second column first paragraph.

-L

Thanks, Luke.

But what I'm needing clarity on is the player's intent for that roll, not their goal or the mission goal. I know the mission continues, and that's how I read p. 91. The twist diverts the mission, not the intent of that failed roll. The intent is never achieved.

Example from my game: Sloan's player wants to use the Glazier skill to help repair the windows in Honeywind's bakery, in the hopes of impressing Thom. Sloan's player rolls and does not beat the obstacle.

My reading: Sloan fails to repair the windows and (twist) the window frames are now completely ruined by her efforts, so Honeywind's baker is even worse off than before.

The other reading: Sloan does eventually repair the windows, but (twist) something about the process puts her, I dunno, in debt to Lester, her enemy.

This is what I'm asking about. The "other" reading says that every roll results in an achieved intent; it's just a matter of the cost to achieve it. My reading says that a Twist means the roll's intent is not achieved.

What I don't know is which reading is correct.

[luke]

You're overthinking this, Buzz.
What does the book say?

-L

[buzz]

You're overthinking this, Buzz.
What does the book say?

-L

As far as I can tell, on a biffed roll you either fail with a twist, or you succeed with a condition.