Feel free to muse along! Monday, May 19, [Trollbabe] Why trollbabes aren’t dogs. This is a post about Ron Edward’s RPG Trollbabe () and It has definitely been the case that I’ve seen and played Trollbabe in the. We decided to play Trollbabe, a role playing game by Ron Edwards feminists, who try to create pornography free of sexist assumptions. Trollbabe [Ron Edwards] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers.
||4 August 2015
|PDF File Size:
|ePub File Size:
||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
I think there’s murk and thus judgment involved in all acts of reading fiction and assessing whether it invokes rules-use, and every rule has different risks. I agree with this!
In Trollbabe the murk can be multifaceted. I want to have a roll about this, but I can’t figure out what Action Type to use. The GM has called for a roll, but I don’t know how to frame a Goal for my trollbabe in this situation.
The whole philosophy of games like Sorcerer and Trollbabe and their similar successors e. They’re what give us what we want and if we skip them we get something less good.
Being ready to roll with it when you find it is part of playing one of these games. Judging the “fiction” the imagined events of play and recognizing which moments we’d like to handle with conflict mechanics IS a fundamental procedure “that we use to play”.
[Trollbabe] (I did it…) My Way
I don’t think you can really take that out. Ron’s “rules” for what constitutes a conflict are guidelines which help us do that. I haven’t actually read them. I don’t know if such a thing is possible, however.
It’s worth exploring, however, pushing the boundaries, and discovering new ways to play. I’m fairly certain that David meant “reading fiction” as a shorthand for “interpreting the fiction that’s developing”.
Not reading literally like reading a bookbut interpreting what you’re ‘reading’ like ‘reading’ a person.
The players have to look at the fiction as it develops and come to a consensus or a decision. If we’re going to have procedures, they need to give us something even bettersomething that we can’t get otherwise. Just for the sake of completeness, this is Eero’s “spooky conflict at a distance” method, which I avoid like the plague. This fres where you look at the zombies as tools of the mage who trollbwbe them. You don’t have a conflict with the zombies any more than you have a conflict with the arrows that that archer over there is shooting at you.
This makes sense, abstractly.
The problem is that the mage is not actually in the scene, which is a rule conflicts are between characters present in the scene, even though that rule is subverted multiple times in examples. It’s unclear how the trollbabe’s goal could be stated in terms of doing something to the mage. This is just like the local ruler in the tower climbing example. It seems to me that if you and your opponent can respond to each otherthen you can have a Trollbabe conflict, and if you can’t, then you can’t.
If an evil sorcerer controls the zombies’ every move, I can fight him by fighting zombies. If an evil sorcerer animated the zombies and then let them go in my path and is sitting back and watching, unable to do anything, then we can’t have a Conflict.
I recently got interested in Trollbabe. Your analysis in this thread and the other one was very helpful in understanding the game. It looks like you’re new here.
Get the Stitcher App
If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons! July edited July in Story Games. So, textual criticism aside, I do really like Trollbabe. Here’s how I wish it was, which is to say, this is how I run it.
It’s not quite a one-to-one rendering of the rule-book, but it’s pretty close. In addition, since I’ve played Trollbabe without trollbabes more than I have with trollbabes, I include some material about retooling the game for other things.
Trollbabe is so easy to re-skin that people tend to be lazy about it.
The world belongs to me. I describe what everything looks like, sounds like, smells and tastes and feels like. Animals, ghosts, demons, gods, whatever. I describe them and supply their dialogue. I invent the Stakes and Consequences and an R-map if I need to and I don’t tell anyone else what they are.
I do the scene framing and the scene cutting. Everyone else in the game is an advisor, but in the end it’s up to me to decide what’s what and what happens. Player and Character I’m the player.
The character belongs to me. I decide how she looks, moves, what she thinks, how she feels, what she says, and what she does. If I say she has red hair, she has red hair. If I say she feels sad, she feels sad. If I say she climbs a tower, she climbs the tower. That doesn’t mean no one else gets to say anything to me – everyone else in the game is an advisor for how I play her.
But I get the last word. Protagonism and Overlap As above, in general the character “just works. This is a reactionary design in two ways: In Trollbabe you will not be an amazing skilled character “someday,” you are one right now, from the word go.
Two, it takes annoyingly excessive task resolution out of the picture. The character doesn’t roll to tie her shoes. Sometimes, though, the spheres of authority overlap. To steal an example from Sorcerer: You bounce off and fall down in the muck. All the baboons laugh and point and jump up and down slapping the ground with their hands. Trollbabe has a safety built in: If your character can’t do it, no one else can even come close.
If your character can’t jump that chasm, then there is no possible annoying NPC who can show up and do it after all to make you look bad. If I say I climb the tower, then I do, or if I can’t climb it then I can rest assured in the safe knowledge that no one can climb that tower and climbing that tower is not a part of what this story is about.
The Procedural Interface So far so good. The above arrangement is one that we can use to good effect in lots of games.
The Gaming Philosopher: [Trollbabe] Why trollbabes aren’t dogs
It’s cool, but not unique or special to this game. It’s a baseline game-loop for free play. Vincent might call it a set of principles for decision-making. Here’s a principle of game design: A procedure is a door in the wall of constraints. I don’t need a procedure to climb the tower; I already have a method for that: I say “I climb the tower.
I do need a procedure to kill Rothgar the NPC. Rothgar belongs to the GM. He’s on the GM’s side of the wall. In that spirit, defining a procedure means stipulating the things that we can’t get without using that procedure. In Trollbabe there are three arenas: Fighting, Magic, and Social. Over the years they have been somewhat vaguely and confusingly applied, but by default, Fighting is for direct violence hurting or restraining peopleMagic is for time-consuming ritualized sorcery, and Social is for controlling the behavior not thoughts or feelings of another character.
If you want to do one of those things, you must use the mechanics. In particular, this is defined in trollnabe of what characters want and what they are willing to do on account of it. So it’s not just “roll for effect. I only roll to use magic fre or against some other character.
This is the first stop on the “re-skinning” trail. We can rename the arenas, make their application broader or more specific, or more or less abstract.
Two of them are in balance by default, increasing Fighting decreases Magic. The most common re-skin of Trollbabe is to just change “Magic” into something genre or setting appropriate and leave the rest of the game as is. Netrunning, chi powers, vampire abilities, etc. I did this myself, many years ago! Here’s one I’d really like to try playing: Sorcerer Descriptors slot in perfectly as is to become Trollbabe Impressions. How would Demons work? A Demon in Sorcerer is an abusive relationship.
Trollbabe is about how much you will hurt your relationships to get what you want. In Sorcerer terms, trollbabes are Demons! Re-rolls Re-rolls are the only currency for character effectiveness in Trollbabe.