Conflict resolution

Greetings everyone.

I have a question about conflicst. lets say there are 2 teams on each side.

  • 1 player from each side make the roll and all the others may add 1 dice for help. Correct?

  • each side decides what are the side objective (and not each team objective). Correct?

  • lets say that the objective of each side is to kill the other side:

      • if side DM win the battle, all players in the battle die? (and vice versa).
      • if the players decide to surrender, do they die?
      • if the players wish to run away/escape from the battle they can? how?
  • If i remember correctly, each team decides an action. Whats the advantage to have a team of 2 mouses (that gives 1 action) instead of having 2 teams of 1 mouse (that gives 2 actions)?

Thanks in advance

  • Miguel
  1. If you’re talking about the disposition roll – one player tests, other members of his team may help.

  2. Each team writes a goal.

3A. Depends on the level of compromise. If there was no compromise, then yes.
3B. Yup.
3C. This is a complex issue in Mouse Guard, but the short answer is “it’s too late to run once you’re fighting.” If you to escape a fight, run before you start fighting.

  1. This has been reviewed many times on the forums. Anyone have those post links?


  1. so in a DM vs Players conflict, if the players side has 2 teams, each team as its own disposition? or all players on the players side (independent of the team) may help on side disposition roll?

  2. lets say the players team A wants to “Kill the enemies” and players Team B want to “make them prisoners”. if the players winthe battle what happens ?

3B. the surrending team dies even if the are still an alive team on his side?

3C. if we are on the GM turn and the players are attacked they cant run, or they may ask for the alternave “we run away. We dont want to fight” ?

I don’t know the links that Luke referenced, but it comes down to three things, I think:

  1. a teammate can help (gives +1D to the other teammate).

  2. two teams with one mouse each could allow the opposing team more options. If the opponent Feints, it will direct that Feint at the team that has a Defend instead of the team that has a Maneuver or Attack, for instance. This only works in the mice’s favour in rare occurrences (it has Defend vs two separate Feint actions, for instance).

  3. most enemies of mice are tough and mean. They tend to have a decent disposition. Single mice don’t tend to have great dispositions by themselves, so there’s a heightened chance for one of the teams (i.e., one of the mice) to take a serious pounding or even die, even if the other team/mouse wins, overall.

  1. 2 teams vs 1 team = each team has it’s own dispo

  2. What’s the level of compromise? Without compromise, the winning team simply gets what it wants.

3B. I don’t understand this question.

3C. Correct. Also, players could set their conflict goal to: “Run!” Why would they do this? They could then use their Nature for tests, since escaping would be part of their goal.

Each team has its own disposition. Helping a patrol member out with disposition automatically places that mouse on that team for the conflict.

Players don’t win battles in this case. Teams do. If team A wins, the enemies are killed. If team B wins, they’re prisoners. If there’s a compromise between all three teams (two mice teams and the opposing team)… well… it’ll be a fun compromise. :slight_smile:

There are no sides. It’s team vs team vs team. If two teams work jointly against another team, they’re still teams and not a “side.” It may seem like nitpicking, but if you think of it this way, I think a lot of your concerns might clear up. One mice team can “win” while the other “loses.”

If they’re ambushed or whatnot, the player team(s) can choose their goal as “We’re running away and losing the snake (or whatever) in the underbrush.” During the conflict, they then describe their actions as applying to their goal. An Attack is a flat-out sprint. A Maneuver might be zig-zagging. A Defend could be diving into underbrush and momentarily gaining an advantage. Whatever works. The descriptions determine what happens, and descriptions should fit the goal.

Once the goals are stated for each team, the conflict is locked in. However, another conflict can follow on the heels of one just finished: Fight can lead to Chase, or Chase to a Fight, or Argument to a Fight, etc.

edit: cross-posted with Luke…

so when i attack i decide wich team i am attacking before or after every team shows the actions ?

That clears it much more :smiley:

Ok, but how do i decide wich one won? cant be the last one to strike because 2 mice teams attaking 1 DM team, all the “damage” is dealt at same time. Is that the one with less compromise? any suggestion?

Also, 2 mice team vs Bandits

  • Mice A want to “kill”
  • Mice B “want to take prisoners”
  • Bandits want to “kill”
    Now Mice A surrender and Mice B win the conflict. What happens to the Mace A team?

so they decide that the goal of the conflict will be to “RUN LIKE HELL”. The conflict stats. Then they fight and if they win, they run away (but if they loose they will be killed). Can they attack and feint of just defend and manuver (or thats on players descretion)?


  • Miguel

Let me say first off that I’m happy to be corrected by experienced Mouse Guard players with regards to anything I say here (or above).

The action of each team is revealed at the same time. The actions are resolved at the same time. So Attack vs Attack vs Attack (with all teams at low disposition) could be really ugly.

Wish I could help, but I have only limited experience with multiple teams. The results of the conflict are determined after the actions are all taken, if one of the teams is reduced to 0 disposition.

Mice A can’t surrender, except to Mice B. Mice A are killing, as per their goal. If the Bandits team beats Mice A, they achieve their goal of “kill the mice.” That team is in trouble, but can get a compromise from the bandit team at that point. Mice B and Bandits keep going.

They can use the full spread of actions, as per any conflict. Just remember that actions are metaphors and not literal. Attack doesn’t mean smash someone in the face or stab them (except in a Fight or Animal conflict). In a Chase, it’s gettin’ the hell outta Dodge. A Feint might be trying to run around a tree to distract the pursuer, etc.

Ok this muiti-team with diferente goals is defenetly making me nuts lol

On page MGRPG p.114 it says: “You can start a conflict involving multiple teams per side…”
By this i would say that there are effectively sides, and on p.103 it states “To represent how strong your side’s position is in the conflict…”

oh my… anyone is able to clear my thoughs about this muiti team/objetive thing?

Hmmm… Okay, think of it this way: there can be multiple sides, and multiple teams. Unless mice in the patrol have goals that differ from one another, they ought to be on the same team. There are more advantages to doing so and the game has a high focus on collaboration for this reason and because that’s a big part of the theme: A group of mice working together against the big, uncaring world.

One team has one goal and everyone on the team suffers the consequences of failure and the benefits of success, and pursue the same goal together. If one member of the patrol doesn’t want to pursue that goal or is siding with another team, they help on that team’s disposition… or sit out by not giving a help die or rolling disposition.

and by siting out, he cant use actions but can add a dice to any team in play each action phase?

I’ve not ever seen it happen in any MG games I’ve GM’d or played in, but the person who sits out does not participate… at all. If they want to give help dice and take actions, etc., they have to either help in team disposition and take part, or sit by and watch how it all comes out.

Actually, according to page 102, Pala is right. A character not taking actions can offer help to any side and is bound by the results of the conflict.

Ah, I’d missed that. Good to know and good call, Pala. :wink: Makes sense as it allows someone coming onto the scene to be involved, while also tossing their lot in with whom they’re helping.