2 VS 1 Team Conflict (another question)

Mouse Guard Getting Started with Mouse Guard
1

Hi

Excuse my French (I hope I won’t make too many mistakes) :slight_smile: but I have some questions about the mechanics of conflicts in Mouse Guard, in fact about the problem of two teams against one.

I have read some posts and answers that said that the lonely team could choose its target after actions had been announced ; it answers some questions but some still remains.

Let’s take the usual example of two mice teams (A and B) fighting a snake. Team A wants to kill the snake while Team B tries to steal its eggs. The snake wants to kill the invading mice.

There are several volleys possibles :

1) A attacks, B attacks, Snake attacks
Simple. A and B help each other (by the way, is it +1D for the entire helping team, or +1D for each mouse constituting it ?)
The snake also rolls independently.

2) A defends, B maneuvers, Snake Attacks
Not so simple if we consider that the snake chooses its target. The team it chooses makes a versus test against it and may loses Disposition if it rolls badly.
But what happens to the team that is left alone ? I’d say it rolls independently against the snake, but then two teams can never help each other in a versus test, contrary to what is written in the rules.

3) A attacks, B maneuvers, Snake feints
If the snake chooses its target, then this configuration becomes simple. The snake feints against B and the two of them make versus tests.
A rolls independently.

Am I right ?

Thank you for your attention (MouseGuard is a really great game by the way ! Many french of our forum have fallen in love with it, and it’s one of the rare roleplaying games that I found as good playing as it was reading !)

Vivien

2

Hi Vivien.

On page 114: “The helping team’s action is like any other help; describe it, and pass one die over.”

2) A defends, B maneuvers, Snake Attacks
Not so simple if we consider that the snake chooses its target. The team it chooses makes a versus test against it and may loses Disposition if it rolls badly.
But what happens to the team that is left alone ? I’d say it rolls independently against the snake, but then two teams can never help each other in a versus test, contrary to what is written in the rules.

I think rereading the Multiple Teams, Multiple Actions section on Page 114 may help. The text reads “if two teams have the same target and choose actions that are both versus their target’s action, they must help each other rather than roll separately.”

So, Snake attacks team A. Its a versus test, Attack v. Defend. Team B helps. If snake attacks Team B, its an Attack v. Maneuver. Team A helps.

3

Thank for your answer Noclue

I understand the principle described in the book, but if we apply this “rule” then 2VS1 conflicts become full of exceptions.

Sometimes you choose your adversary and the other one is left alone (attack and manoeuvers against feint, defend and attack against feint), sometimes you look at the interaction of the two teams to determine if they must help each other (defend and manoeuver against attack, attack and attack against defend).

It’s a bit odd to have many ways to deal. :frowning:

4

Actually, I screwed that one up. You always look at the interaction of the two teams to see if they must help each other. In this case they’re both Versus compared to the Snakes attack. So they must help each other. The next step is to decide which action you’re playing and which action is just helping. When choosing the acting and helping teams, it doesn’t appear matter which team the snake attacks. So, when the snakes attack is revealed, the mice teams decide which action is just helping and the snake goes for its target. The targeted team just takes the dispo hit.

5

And here’s a previous postthat might clear stuffs up.

6

Thanks, it helped a lot (if we consider that Thor is right of course). :smiley:

Let me try to recapitulate, with A and B teams fighting the snake :

  1. We reveal the action of each team

  2. The snake chooses its target

  3. We cross the choices on the Interaction Table :

  • if A and B obtained identical interactions (VS and VS or Ind and Ind or Feint and Feint), they must help each other and choose which one of them will roll . If it is a versus test and if the snake wins, the beast must damage the team it had chosen for target in phase 2 (even if that team has just helped the other one for the roll)

  • if A and B both chose Feint and the snake chose Defend, then the snake cannot roll. A and B help each other for the independent test. Same with Attack+Attack against Feint.

  • if A and B both chose Defend and the snake chose Feint, then the snake rolls independently ; A and B don’t roll.

Now more complex cases :

  • if A receives a versus test and B an independent test.
  • If the snake decides to target team A (the versus test), it makes a versus test against it as usual and applies remaining successes on it. B rolls independently, as normal.
  • Now if the snake decides to target team B (independent against independent), then B and the snake make their roll as usual. Then team A (the versus test) rolls, but with an Obstacle equal to the snake’s roll. A bit complicated, but at least it solves many problems.
  • A more complex example : if A feints, B defends and the snake feints (it targets B of course). B cannot roll (Defense is canceled by feint). Then the snake rolls independently against B to diminish its disposition. Then A rolls, with an obstacle equals to the snake’s roll ; if A fails, it just cannot diminish the snake’s disposition ; the snake isn’t allowed a “free action” against it, since it targeted the B team.

The only problem that remains is the “Feint case” :
A attacks, B feints and the snake feints : does A cancel the snake’s action, allowing A and B to help each other and roll independently ? Or does A roll independently, then B and the snake make a versus test as if the feint didn’t cancel anything ?

EDIT if I trust this thread :
http://www.burningwheel.org/forum/showthread.php?8004-A-Question-about-Scripting-in-Conflicts&highlight=conflict
Then A rolls independently (Attack against Feint), and the snake (which targets team B of course) rolls versus team B (feint against feint)
So, a lonely team can almost never lose its action (only if its two adversaries choose the same action, Feint+Feint against Defend or Attack+Attack against Feint).

7

Finally, if everything I said before was right (I hope so), there is still one situation that is problematic : A attacks, B maneuvers and the snake feints.

The snake targets B to avoid being countered by A. But then we find that A rolls independently (Attack against Feint), and that B rolls independently too (Maneuver against Feint).

Two independent rolls, A and B must help each other. But what happens if it is A that rolls primarily ? The snake must then face team A, which chose Attack, which should have countered Feint ?

I imagine we should consider that the snake, targeting B, can still make its roll against the two teams assembled, even if it is A that makes the roll.

8

One clarification, Team A is rolling against an Obstacle = 0 on that Attack v. Feint, because the snake can’t attack or defend. I’m not sure that is technically considered the same as an Independent test for purposes of helping (as in your follow up case where B maneuvers). However, my MG-fu isn’t strong enough.

9

That sounds a bit far-fetched but on the other hand it would solve everything…

Is there anyone else who could confirm that’s the way it should be played ?

10

Ok, I’ll try to resume it all, one last time :

When many teams confront another, lonely one
1 Script as usual (you don’t have to precise which team you target)
2 Reveal your first action ; the lonely team can then decides which team it targets

3 Cross all the choices on the Interaction Table

  • All Independant tests against the same target must help each other

  • All Versus tests against the same target must help each other

  • Versus and Independant tests are treated separately

  • If the lonely team choses a target against which it obtains an Independant Test and if its ennemies obtained a Versus Test against it, then the lonely team must use its roll for both (that means that its Independant test also serves as obstacle against the Versus test of the ennemies)

  • a team feinting against a team defending obtains an Independant roll, and a team defending against a team feinting loses its roll (therefore if the team is defending against another team, it doesn’t loses its roll

  • a team attacking against a team feinting obtains an Independant roll, and a team feinting against a team attacking loses its roll (therefore if the team is feinting against another team, it doesn’t loses its roll)

What do you think about it ?

11

These muddled circumstances all revolve around feint, which is about taking advantage of the circumstances. With the intent to feint, a team will find the best open area to strike. The reason the feint seems to fail during a 1on1 attack is that there is no opening.

You started the scenario mentioning that the two mouse teams have paralell (rather than identical) goals. With those in mind, the terms attack and feint can take on different meanings for team B, since team B is actually trying to destroy the eggs, not kill the snake. This whole scenario can become complicated by the fact that working towards destroying the eggs and working towards killing the snake are seperate goals. The snake is certainly the active opposing force in both cases, but partially acheiving the destruction of the eggs doesn’t partially acheive the death of the snake… unless you think she’s depressed.

In another circumstance, if A and B were chasing C, and A’s goal was killing C, and B’s goal was capturing C, you can see more clearly where there could be a problem, and in this case it may become a three-sided conflict as A and B begin to trip eachother up.

How would this (or any) conflict of interest be handled? If C’s disposition is reduced to 0 first, do you then compare A and B’s disposition to determine C’s actual fate? I guess all we know from C’s 0 disposition is that they didn’t escape. Similarly, all we’d know from the snake’s 0 disp that she didn’t kill the mice…

I suppose that makes enough sense, I’m just too used to hitpoints I suppose.

I guess part of what I’m asking is: in what way does the “attack” of team B against the snake, reduce the snake’s ability to kill the mice? (B is “taking a shot at” destroying the eggs, which reduces the snake’s disposition, which only says she’s less likely to end up killing the mice.)

I know… it’s a million vaguely linked, poorly sepparated questions that I’ve partially answered myself, but I suppose I just havn’t actually seen the conflict rules in action with proper role-playing to back it up.