Let It Ride?

So, if you fail a test to find a secret door, and the GM responds with a twist (ambushed by kobolds, say), can you try again to find the secret door after the fight? I can’t find anything that says that you can’t, and it does use up a turn after all.

On a related note, if there is no secret door, do you just say that? No door = no obstacle = no test = no turn?

Usually, the results stand for a session (this is how it’s done in Burning Wheel).

In general, the only way to re-test is for conditions to change. So if the twist somehow changes the situation in appropriate way (a cave in exposes new area of the room for example), then yes.

Otherwise, the dice stand.

To answer your other question, one way to play it is to let the dice determine the door. If they succeed, the discover the door. If they fail, they set off a trap (this is the twist, which could also be the cave in above).

There’s no Let it Ride in Mouse Guard. I assume they didn’t add it to Torchbearer, but still reading.

It is not there by name in MB but the gist of it is there. Dice decisions stay put for scope specified/implied, usually meaning till significant shift in conditions (Rule 0, don’t be a Dick, holding sway as well :wink: ). “The session” tends to work out pretty well as the minimum, lots of things can change in several weeks or the changing of a season and a new chapter in the story tends to give respectable narrative respect, too. Especially if the PCs have being working on the issue (because apparently it is important enough to bring up again) from other angles in the meantime.

On a related note, if there is no secret door, do you just say that? No door = no obstacle = no test = no turn?

Given the very limited resource that Tests/Turns are, and that the GM is the one that declares/initiates Tests rather than the players (right?), that strikes me as some major screwage to declare a Test with no real upside for success.

But no rules quote to base that on.

I was actually quoting one of Luke’s posts above about MG not having Let it Ride.

I’m don’t believe there’s a dice rolls stick for x length of time rule, either explicit or implied in MG. After a Twist, the GM can move from Twist to Twist or “move the story forward as if the patrol had overcome the initial obstacle that caused the twist.” You don’t need let it ride because the GM never presents the same challenge.

But that is where it is implied. It ‘rides’ because the GM moves on. :wink:

Let It Ride needs to be more explicit, and more reciprocal rule in BW/BE because the players have more control of where things are going (EDIT:and they do things to each other so often with the GM as an aghast/giggling bystander :smiley: ). MG, and to an even greater extent TB, has the GM with providence over things such that they just move on and that settles the matter. Where players have that kind of control is tightly resource limited by Checks, and in MB in window once per session player’s turn. Similar case with TB.

EDIT: See the discussion about Cartography in another active thread here. Success means you get to use that map to get where you are going in the future, too, without requiring a new test. It doesn’t use the words “Let It Ride” but I’m not sure how to argue that it isn’t LiR in spirit?

There is no “Let It Ride” rule in Mouse Guard or Torchbearer. The closest analog is Fun Once. But in TB, there are many other reasons why LIR is unnecessary.

I believe they don’t need to test again since you offered a twist or condition. Page 8: Twist or Condition says that the GM introduces a twist or gives a condition in exchange for success. Assuming there was a door in the first place, the twist (ambushed by kobolds) is the entirety of the failure and after that they should find the door (maybe the kobolds were waiting on the other side). If there wasn’t a door in the first place, the intent of the task should be deemed invalid and no test called for.

Page 65, “Failure”, explains it in more detail and words it differently. “[E]ither a twist is introduced or the character succeeds, but with a condition.

That’s correct. If the GM introduces a twist, then whatever the players were attempting was a failure.

Which is an important difference from Mouse Guard.

That is one thing that has not changed.

If the players fail to overcome the obstacle in MG, the GM can inject a twist. After the twist he has the option to move the story forward as if the initial obstacle had been overcome – going back to the original obstacle would mean violating the Fun Once rule. (This is more or less paraphrasing the Failed Tests section in the Resolution chapter (p. 91).) It’s still a failure, you just go on to the next bit of the GM turn.

I think that this is maybe one of the most misunderstood things about Mouse Guard. I know that for the longest time, for some reason I believed that in Mouse Guard, “there is no failure”. Rather, you either outright succeeded at something, or your failure was converted to success but at the cost of a condition or a twist. It seems that in both systems, the only thing that converts “failure” to “success” is a condition.

Due to my current condition (Tired), I am not about to dig through my backup copy of the internet for sources to cite, but I believe that I heard/read “there are no failures in Mouse Guard” in various podcasts and reviews/articles. Hopefully we can nip that kind of talk in the bud if/when we see it used regarding TB.

I contend that there really isn’t any ‘Failure’ in Mouse Guard. With Twists you don’t achieve your intent because the story goes in an unexpected direction and a new obstacle presents itself. That’s different from failing at your attempt. The text is pretty careful about how it describes the twist.

If you, the GM, choose to twist the
direction of the story or inject a
complication into the lives of the
patrol, you get to decide on a whole new
obstacle for the guardmice to contend with, a
brand new problem that’s developed because
of their bumbling!

It doesn’t say that if you fail a scout test to sneak up on the badger, the badger hears you. Look what can (can, not must, of course) happen after the Twist:

They dust off their paws and say,
“Now that that’s over with, we can get back
to business.” Move the story forward as if the
patrol had overcome the initial obstacle that
caused the twist

There is definitely failure in TB though :wink:

given the text on page 91 of Mouse Guard -
Alternately, if the twist is successfully dealt with, the patrol moves back on track for their mission. They dust off their paws and say, “Now that that’s over with, we can get back to business.” Move the story forward as if the patrol had overcome the initial obstacle that caused the twist. Either put a new obstacle in their path or move to the completion of the mission—they arrive at the city, they encounter a stranded mouse, they pour the scent, they recover the mail, etc.
(emphasis & color mine)

the only difference between twist and success in MG is the intervening encounter and which experience dot you check. In other words, failure in MG does not derail the GM’s story during the GM turn. It has, as they say, “no teeth”… well, the potential to take conditions and/or wind up escalating to a conflict and dying, but short of death, in the GM turn, you cannot fail the mission without either dying, or being captured; anything else resolves the scene to the same point as having succeeded.

This is clearly not the case in TB. TB in fact reads:
Twists are new challenges to overcome. They can be immediate obstacles—you’re ambushed!—or something that causes trouble further down the line. Twists can also be played so that the character appears to have succeeded at his task, but in truth he’s just waded deeper into trouble.
(p. 65, emphasis original, color mine)
Twists increase the pressure on the players. As gear is
depleted and conditions pile up, each twist becomes more
fraught with danger. Each twist requires more time and more
resources to overcome.

(p.125. Emphasis & color mine)

Because you can die from simply taking extra time. At 28 rolled actions without a chance to recover, you die. (See TB, p. 60)

MG won’t kill a character with twists, and dead isn’t actually a condition in MG. It’s a different tone, and a very different approach.

On the original topic…

Binding Results
Conflict results, victories and compromise are binding results. Your character is convinced, captured, tricked or whatever result came up in play. That result stands until challenged by another conflict or a twist.

That’s not “Let It Ride” - but it is similar in application. Once established, it’s not up to the players to change facts established in compromises or failures.

slashdevnull is correct. Failure is ever-present in Mouse Guard. In Deliver the Mail, if the raven snatches the mailbag as a twist, the patrol might try to chase it with Health or keep an eye on it with Scout. But fail those tests? The twist is it flies away with the bag. The story has moved forward.

The bag is gone. The players can choose to attempt to track the raven to its nest and steal the bag or otherwise confront the raven for it if they choose. That’s the only way they’re going to get that mail back. Otherwise they’re completing their journey empty-handed.

Should we split off the discussion about failure in MG? I was just about to open a new thread when I noticed Thor’s answer.

Apart from that –

Yet the rules say “That result stands until challenged by another conflict or a twist.” This is one thing I’ve been wondering about – when is it appropriate to initiate a new conflict and “re-negotiate” a compromise?

My guiding principle in MG was that the affected player CANNOT instigate the change. Burning wheel I’m even harsher.

Might be a good idea :wink:

It’s almost like no one has read the text and no one is listening. Let me try bold and caps:

–Luke Crane on Mouse Guard, December, 2008