Finding the Line between GM and Player turns.

Mouse Guard Getting Started with Mouse Guard
1

Still relatively new to mouseguard. (I’ve previously played as a Guard once, and GM for 2 sessions from the book). Struggling a bit with the whole gm turn/player turn mechanic.
The best guideline I can find is that there should be no time for distractions during the gm turn. If the story slows for a bit then that’s the time for a player turn. This may result in large stories being told over multiple sessions.
In practice I’m finding that fine in the wilderness, but I want to run some settlement based adventures and it’s looking a bit vague.

Here’s how it went down in our last session:

Inspired by For Conrad - Sadie’s Initiative I’m running a mouseguard campaign set in early spring following the comics. The guard are undergoing major restructuring to ensure they do not face rebellion again. To this end barracks are being constructed in the major settlements establishing a permanent guard presence responsible for all local matters.

For the most part the settlements have been receptive to the idea. Each barracks will bring employment opportunities and wealth to the settlement hosting it.

Partly through determination (but mainly through ignorance of comic details) the patrol has selected Barkstone as the settlement for barracks construction. I could not have wished for a better outcome. It will involve an epic struggle as this is where the rebellion originated.

Mission:
Establish a foothold in Barkstone such that the guard may use it as a base of operations.

The Patrol:

Patrol Leader Gahens of Barkstone
B: Mice do not bow to nature.
I: Strike from Strength.
G: Recruit 3 civilians of Barkstone to act as Guard ambassadors.
Notes: Overall a jack of all trades with 6 survivalist, 3 fire-wise and 4 persuader.

Patrol Guard Jaxon Steelwright of Copperwood
B: The only worthy death is in battle.
I: Fight before Flight.
G: Identify primary opposition in Barkstone.
Notes: Total specialist in sword fighting and crafting, has created master crafted swords for Gahens and himself. Utterly fearless (not even of owls) yet still maintains nature 4 as an absolute hoarder.

GM Turn:

I open with the journey from Lockhaven to Barkstone. Snow has freshly melted and the paths are yet to be remapped. At ob 6 the party don’t have a chance. Jaxon takes my advice and uses Fearless against himself to boldly lead the patrol in completely the wrong direction.

Twist:
They find themselves crossing a valley (old creek bed) as a flash flood hits. With survival 6 this isn’t the obstacle. The construction crew desperately trying to re-enforce their bridge are. They call to the guards for help. But the guards attention is elsewhere. A sodden mouse clings with desperation to a rock, the water threatening to wash him away with every passing second.

This is resolved as a complex action with Gahens failing to persuade the construction foremouse to give them rope. They steal it anyway (at condition: Guard less liked by local builders guild) and Jaxon dives in to save the mouse (Gahens has far more survivalist, but isn’t nearly stupid enough). Despite heroically blowing a persona and fate point Jaxon fails the roll. I award the rescue at the price of injured and tired (later modified to just injured when I realized how hard it is to recover). Without the guards lending their support the bridge collapses, fortunately Gahens was able to persuade the crew to abandon the bridge and jump to safety.

The rescued mouse gives them directions to Barkstone and they arrive without further incident.

No Guard have been to Barkstone since the rebellion, it’s unknown how how they’ll be received. I propose a ob 3 scout test to sneak in undetected.
They aren’t having with that spy stuff and march up to the main gate. They fail an ob 4 persuade check and are not allowed to bring weapons with them. They accept and enter after hiding their precious blades in the wilderness.

Now the turn sequence gets a little tricky. The pace has dropped but I want to give them a direct path to complete their mission before switching over to player turn.

There is almost a gm turn interval as they visit Gahens’s parents to gather information on the town. They discover that Guardmice are widely and openly hated in Barkstone. Any businesses supporting the guard are poorly treated by the rest of the community. Worst of all is Mayor Wormwood who actively promotes this culture.

The final obstacle is to establish a mouseguard foothold in Barkstone. Skill type and ob level to be determined by their requirements. They decide on a public business to act as a cover for their other operations. Jaxon puts his wealth on the line to buy the backstreet business, barely passing the ob3 resource test.

Player Turn:
Jaxon rest up recovering from his bruised ribs.
Gahens successfully persuades 3 locals to become guardmice PR agents.
Jaxon buys a forge for his new tool making business.

2

Limited time to respond ATM but just want to say that those beliefs and instincts rock!

3

At this point, I would have called for the Players’ Turn. They’ve faced two hazards (Pathfinder test and Persuader test) and a twist; now it’s time for them to use their checks to complete their mission. Your players had clear Goals, so I don’t think they would have suffered from a lack of direction during their turn. If you thought there still were specific tasks necessary for them to set up the barracks in Barkstone, you could have rolled those into the next mission.

What rewards were earned at the end of the session?

4

Daniel has you covered on GMs turn, but I have a few suggestions about the session that I hope will be helpful.

Quick question, why the wrong direction? You’re applying a Twist, a flash flood and bridge in jeopardy, why proceed that with Failure? Give the mouse his awesome moment of fearlessness leading them in the RIGHT direction, and then hit them with the flood.

This is resolved as a complex action with Gahens failing to persuade the construction foremouse to give them rope. .They steal it anyway (at condition: Guard less liked by local builders guild)
Okay, Gahens rolls Persuader against the foremouse and the foremouse rolls higher. The GM’s options are Gahens succeeds with a Condition or a Twist happens. Conditions are Tired, Angry, Sick, Hungry, Injured.

So, for example, you can turn to the player and say “the foremouse isn’t listening and you’re so frustrated you start getting really ANGRY. In your heated passion what do you say that convinces him to go your way?” Gahens gets success with the Angry condition. I wouldn’t do, Gahens fails to convince the foremouse, but they get some condition and figure about a way to compensate for his failure. And apply conditions on the PCs from the list, rather than a narrative condition on the NPCs. Or apply a Twist.

Jaxon dives in to save the mouse (Gahens has far more survivalist, but isn’t nearly stupid enough). Despite heroically blowing a persona and fate point Jaxon fails the roll. I award the rescue at the price of injured and tired (later modified to just injured when I realized how hard it is to recover).

Cool! That’s how it’s done. Success for one Condition.

They fail an ob 4 persuade check and are not allowed to bring weapons with them. They accept and enter after hiding their precious blades in the wilderness.

Was this presented as a Twist?

Now the turn sequence gets a little tricky. The pace has dropped but I want to give them a direct path to complete their mission before switching over to player turn.

I’m with Daniel. Good place to end the GMs turn.

5

I hope you won’t count me as some jerk. I don’t mean for anything to come off unkindly.

I would like to add the guideline that as a game, this is one of the mechanics. Just as a player who follows the rules of chess cannot move his king as he would move his queen, nor the bishop as he would the knight, players who know and follow the rules of Recovery know that it costs two checks to test for recovering from conditions during the GM Turn. It is an important guideline: the rules help make this from collaborative story-telling into a game.

The guard are undergoing major restructuring to ensure they do not face rebellion again. To this end barracks are being constructed in the major settlements establishing a permanent guard presence responsible for all local matters.
This is a good premise. This represents a major change in the relationship between the Guard and the settlements. It creates loads of room for conflict.

Mission:
Establish a foothold in Barkstone such that the guard may use it as a base of operations.

The Patrol:

Patrol Leader Gahens of Barkstone
B: Mice do not bow to nature.
I: Strike from Strength.
G: Recruit 3 civilians of Barkstone to act as Guard ambassadors.
Notes: Overall a jack of all trades with 6 survivalist, 3 fire-wise and 4 persuader.

Patrol Guard Jaxon Steelwright of Copperwood
B: The only worthy death is in battle.
I: Fight before Flight.
G: Identify primary opposition in Barkstone.
Notes: Total specialist in sword fighting and crafting, has created master crafted swords for Gahens and himself. Utterly fearless (not even of owls) yet still maintains nature 4 as an absolute hoarder.

Here is the first area I’m worried about how I’ll come off as a jerk.
Those are not good instincts. It would be best to rewrite those in such a way that the GM and other players can trigger them to occur.

For example:

  • When planning an ambush, strike from the high ground
  • Do not provoke a fight when overwhelmed by fatigue
  • When cornered, try fighting before trying to run
  • Do not assume failure until I have fought for success

The beliefs are not bad, but the beliefs are rather large scope. I wouldn’t suggest a change, but it appears those are written for the large scope of the campaign premise. However, do keep in mind the players will have to make them count even in small obstacles. If the sessions tend to revolve around small events and details, they might not feel as though the beliefs get challenged.

No Guard have been to Barkstone since the rebellion, it’s unknown how how they’ll be received. I propose a ob 3 scout test to sneak in undetected.
They aren’t having with that spy stuff and march up to the main gate. They fail an ob 4 persuade check and are not allowed to bring weapons with them. They accept and enter after hiding their precious blades in the wilderness.
the sneaking would be better tested by Nature (hiding) than by Scout. Scout is for finding.

From your description it seems that most things that happen are getting considered for a test. That doesn’t have to be the case. You can decide what the obstacle is (animal, mice, weather, wilderness), then sketch an approximate plan for how the obstacle either conflicts with the duties assigned, or stomps on a PC BIG. Once you’ve got an idea of what the obstacle is and how it gets in the way, then you can list out a few ways the patrol might overcome the obstacle.

You don’t have to tell them, nor do they have to guess. Let them use table chatter to come up with a plan. Let some role-play add clarification and some untested progress or dead-ends on the efforts before establishing a factored Ob or Vs.

I would not have required a test to persuade the bridge workers. I’d have told them about seeing the bridge and seeing the nearly drowning mouse. I’d let them decide what matters most and take action.

Similarly, I would have done as you did in getting into Barkstone and establishing a foothold. It seems they were told the stakes of it and decided for themselves how to proceed. Both solutions were fairly creative–face-to-face at the entrance, setting up a business and hiring PR agents. These are certainly good places to consider testing. In the case of getting in the door, if they can’t get into the town from the start, that is a big obstacle to fulfilling the duty. In the case of getting a foothold, if they can’t find a way to settle into the community, they haven’t fulfilled the duty.

I don’t always have the same pattern for creating missions, but I do always have a strong idea of the obstacles I’m going to use and a rough idea of how they will need to overcome those obstacles. Once I present and listen to table-chatter, I solidify the plan and drive forward.

Most important, not everything contains enough conflict to invoke a test. (for example, the opening pathfinder to Barkstone–I wouldn’t place the conflict right there. I’d have just sent them on the path and told them about the wilderness obstacle of a flash flood. The pathfinder wasn’t the drama, the flood was the drama.)

6

Thank you, we discussed them at length to get them right.

This is something my group doesn’t want. We’d all like to see the bare bones of the mission completed in the GM turn. All my players are happy adding extra mission goals that require player checks. This is where they get to shape the adventure to their characters.

I felt the single action of diving recklessly into the flood to rescue the mouse satisfied playing to the belief and instinct of both mice. They would have had far greater chance of success had Gahens dived in, but that would have required playing against both their instincts.
Jaxon got workhorse, and Gahens best role player.

Mechanically it makes no difference. It’s a failed test with a twist either way. Fluff wise the location of the bridge is between Shaleburrow and Ironwood. The destruction of the bridge could result in complications for the guard next time they visit those settlements.

The GM’s options are Gahens succeeds with a Condition or a Twist happens. Conditions are Tired, Angry, Sick, Hungry, Injured.

Noted. Does this mean that gear can only be lost as part of conflict resolution?

Was this (not allowed weapons) presented as a Twist?

Umm… Rereading the rules this doesn’t fit as either a twist or a condition. Despite it’s small size maybe this should have been run as a argument conflict?

Looks like I worded my original query badly. We are still struggling with the principle of a GM turn then player turn. But we accept it as part of mouseguard and are doing our best to play it correctly.
Where we struggle is in determining what content goes in each turn. The book lays out very clear rules for the first session but things become vague after that. There’s an example of players using a player check to travel to Barkstone after finding the merchant in the snake. This just baffles me. Surely if they do nothing in the player turn their next GM mission will include the journey to Barkstone.

the sneaking would be better tested by Nature (hiding) than by Scout. Scout is for finding.

Noted, we tend to forget that things other than skills can be tested. The idea was to look for an alternative entrance. Barkstone is concealed inside a tree with a single fortified public entrance.

From your description it seems that most things that happen are getting considered for a test. That doesn’t have to be the case.

That’s pretty much my understanding of how mouseguard works. The GM turn consists of nothing but a series of obstacles with no time for anything in between. In the player turn nothing happens unless someone spends a check to allow a test. All the role playing is in the descriptions of those rolls. This isn’t Dogs of the Vineyard with it’s “Say yes or roll” mechanic.

I would not have required a test to persuade the bridge workers. I’d have told them about seeing the bridge and seeing the nearly drowning mouse. I’d let them decide what matters most and take action.

There’s a number of ways that could have been run. Maybe I should have played to the passion of their beliefs and let it become a full scale conflict where they try to save both the mouse and the bridge. I didn’t do it that way as they would have been utterly stomped.

Most important, not everything contains enough conflict to invoke a test. (for example, the opening pathfinder to Barkstone–I wouldn’t place the conflict right there. I’d have just sent them on the path and told them about the wilderness obstacle of a flash flood. The pathfinder wasn’t the drama, the flood was the drama.)

I considered jumping straight to the flood, but these are new players. I wanted to demonstrate the value in accepting failure and earning checks.

7

I’d say this depends on the pattern of seasons-to-sessions. I typically play a session per season. This means that from the end of one session to the beginning of the next, I might describe the group doing a variety of things. The session is only a portion of their time.

If the group didn’t spend a check to reach Barkstone, that’s fine. If I’m inclined to place their next mission there, I’ll place them in Barkstone as the next session begins and present the duties. I’ll let them make Goals and review Beliefs and Instincts. Then, I’ll present the first obastacle, and we’re off.

However, I can understand that playing as a session-by-session campaign, you might not worry too much about the seasons except based on the number of weather twists (as descibed on page 136).

In any case, If I place the patrol in a new location, since they didn’t spend a check to Pathfind their way to that place, then they missed out on testing the skill for a pass/fail. On the other hand, even if there was a Pathfinder test, I might still place them in a new location.

That’s pretty much my understanding of how mouseguard works. The GM turn consists of nothing but a series of obstacles with no time for anything in between. In the player turn nothing happens unless someone spends a check to allow a test. All the role playing is in the descriptions of those rolls. This isn’t Dogs of the Vineyard with it’s “Say yes or roll” mechanic.
That mantra from Dogs in the Vinyard of, “Say yes, or roll,” is an excellent example of how I run a session. I don’t think every action garners enough conflict, or stomps on a Belief hard enough, or confronts the duties of the mission enough to require a test.

well, I think we might both be on the same page, but addressing it in different ways. The GM Turn consists of an assigned or assumed duty and a couple obstacles and twists that distract or conflict with the mission at hand. Some intermediate portions of overcoming the obstacle matter enough for a test, but usually I only get into tests that directly face the obstacle I’ve planned. Everything else is sort of, “Say yes, or save it for the Player Turn.”

In the Player Turn, loads of stuff can happen–even without checks, but some actions have enough latent conflict to require a check on behalf of the player in order for their PC to get the results desired. Other things might not have much conflict (like Resourcing new equipment), but still may require the player to ‘pay up’ in a check to get the results desired.

I’ve certainly played out Player Turns in which the player simply had to show interest in getting something, going somewhere, or talking to someone. I’d say, “things go as you described; now what?” This is where I am looking for a conflict to provoke a test. Maybe just trying to track down a prominent mouse didn’t deserve a check, but trying to convince them into a new way of thinking deserves an Argument Conflict. Perhaps traveling from one settlement to another isn’t hard, but once there, they find the town needs them to take action which requires a test.

Ultimately, I ask players to tell me the task and/or intent. I’ll try my hardest to provide a challenge. If they just want a pass/fail against a particular skill of ability, we can do that.

If they want to have an audience with the king of Dawnrock, I’ll have a Circles test. If instead, they want to convince the king of Dawnrock to hand over a sailing vessel or pardon a pirate that helped them survive a storm, I’ll ignore the Circles test and go straight for the Persuader, Deceiver, Haggler test to support what they’re paying for with their check.

There’s a number of ways that could have been run. Maybe I should have played to the passion of their beliefs and let it become a full scale conflict where they try to save both the mouse and the bridge. I didn’t do it that way as they would have been utterly stomped.
I wouldn’t agree with a conflict. That serves well as a single test. Also, part of what makes that scene challenging, is that the patrol probably can’t serve both purposes; they are forced to attempt one task or the other–save the bridge or save a mouse. So, even in the case of a conflict, I’d keep the focus on one result at a time.

I considered jumping straight to the flood, but these are new players. I wanted to demonstrate the value in accepting failure and earning checks.
that is a good plan. It will sink in with new players over time. They need the encouragement of gaining checks.

I once had a new player tell me, “failing sucks. i end up with conditions to recover or get sidetracked from the mission. i’d rather never put myself through the failure even to gain checks.” So, if they get accustomed to seeing that failures will occur naturally, then they might as well get checks for the Player Turn.

Have you seen my list of suggestions for the Player Turn (link)?

8

I see where the fundamental difference in our play style is. By having a play session cover so much mouse time it make sense to role play straight through lesser events. A very DitV approach.
We plan on running on the opposite end of the spectrum with a session being 1-4 mouse weeks. Far less significant events become worthy of a test.

This very zoomed in approach is the only way we can understand the gm then player turn sequence. Otherwise it’s possible to bypass events important to the players and simply because they’re not allowed to spend checks interrupting the gm turn. We found this to be the case in our first game. (A First Attempt at Mouse Guard)
We were so dissatisfied with the system we didn’t try it again for over 3 years.

Have you seen my list of suggestions for the Player Turn

Indeed I have. Although I confess to not remembering it was yours. A very useful list.
I’m fond of “Attend a Festival”, “Teach a Fellow”, “Find a Gift for Those Who Helped” and “Write a report for Gwendolyn”. I had not thought of those myself.

9

You’re right that mechanically there’s no difference, but in running Mouse Guard, I think it’s huge. My personal philosophy when running MG is, outside of Conflict, mice do not fail. Conditions are the price for success and Twists are success interrupted. So, with every Condition I take a moment to allow the mouse to be shown to be successful (Rather than saying to the player “Oh, because you failed that roll your mouse is tired.”) and with every Twist I try to proceed it with a moment that displays a competent guardsmouse doing his job.

The reason behind this is that the players will roll traitors a lot. If these rolls become moments that show the player’s failure, it hardly matters if the mouse gets what they want. Conditions and Twists come to be seen as punishments for failure and the players start seeing the game as one in which their character can’t succeed at anything. That can happen in a session where the patrol has ultimately achieved every one of their goals.

Noted. Does this mean that gear can only be lost as part of conflict resolution?

Well, not with Conditions. You can take just about anything away in a Twist, but my instinctive response is not to worry so much about taking things from the mice and to focus on the fiction and how to send it into an interesting new direction. That may include loss of something, but it should grow organically from what’s happening at the table.

Umm… Rereading the rules this doesn’t fit as either a twist or a condition. Despite it’s small size maybe this should have been run as a argument conflict?

I think a versus was fine here, but its a good moment for success with a Condition. If the relevant conditions were already full, and I couldn’t come up with an interesting Twist, I would probably not have allowed the Persuader test (the guard has his orders, right?) and told them it would be Nature test to sneak weapons into town.

10

This is fine, although I’ve had a lot of success calling for the Players’ Turn before the mission is completed. For your group, I’d suggest using complex obstacles and conflicts for your mission hazards, to give the players more opportunities to earn checks for the Players’ Turn, as that is where everyone’s interests seem to lie. In the GM’s turn, I’d recommend presenting them with strong situations that incorporate their Beliefs, Instincts, hometowns, and relationships, however the twist you described with the flash flood looks like it hit the players’ Beliefs and Instincts nicely.

Did they earn Persona points for completing their Goals?