In our last TB session the party was assaulted by giant bats in a small room with 3 exits: the tunnel we came in through, another tunnel in the floor, and the door we had just knocked down which startled the bats. From the GM’s description the bats were nasty and agitated so we decided to run for it. The GM told us the goal of the bats was to hurt us and drive us out of the room (more on this later). We were thoroughly beaten in the ensuing Flee Conflict and earned only the smallest of compromises. The GM said we fled, but we could not go through the door (at least my character’s desired direction) and we were given the Injured and Angry conditions. I’m still not quite clear what our compromise got us. After some grumbling on the player’s part (myself included) we took our lumps and continued with a very entertaining session. However, discussing the Conflict afterwards, we have run into some disagreement about how it should have been resolved.
By my understanding of the rules:
Monsters should not have Conflict goals. Only the party has a Conflict goal. I think this he been cleared up now after some discussion. There has been some confusion since several of us have been reading Mouse Guard 2e. However, to reiterate, if I (as a player) engage, for example, a creature in a Capture Conflict, it has no other goal/intent/motivation/etc. apart from “don’t get captured”. The creature may have an Instinct or other motivations in its description, such as “always steal every bit of gold I can get my grubby claws on”; however that doesn’t change the nature of the Conflict. With the same example, if I Lose the Capture Conflict, the creature escapes (or another suitable resolution of the GMs choosing) but it doesn’t mean it gets to escape AND rob me blind, right?
p. 73, Losing a Conflict; You do not accomplish your goal as stated. I interpret this to mean that we could not have fled as a result of losing. The bats could have cut off any escape route, however, the GM wanted to do something enterprising (a la p. 72, Enterprising GMs should feel free to add to this list (list of Suggested Conflict Compromises). Nonetheless, since there was no compromise my understanding is that we could not have fled. Does adding to the list include inflicting a condition or even more than one, on top of the party not achieving their goal? Other prominent members of the TB community have said that Twists and Conditions are in the GMs toolbox when the GM wins a conflict. To me that says that the GM can do anything they like without limitations by winning a Conflict. Interestingly, the GM wins column on p.73 does not list a single Condition. Is a GM able to dole out conditions and a twist as a result of winning?
I would appreciate some clarification on this. Thanks!