Sneak Past conflict

Has anyone written down a rules for a Sneak Past sort of conflict? Have you tried them out? How successful were they, in your opinion?

I am going to muse on this topic for a moment. Just get some thoughts and opinions down.

On one hand, a single Scout role often seems enough, with failure indicating that the party has been detected. The party is moving through a room, and some guards are in an adjacent room, behind a closed door. Just roll Scout, in my opinion.

On the other hand, I love the idea of drawing out the suspense over the course of multiple rolls and fluctuations in disposition, letting the players tell me exactly how they are using the environment to their advantage, telling them how the environment is working against them. I think that the four basic conflict actions are ripe for suspenseful interpretation here. You want to Feint? Sure, throw that pebble down the corridor to send the guard off in the other direction. You want to Regroup? Find some deep dark shadows and hold up real quiet-like for a moment.

What sort of compromises might be reasonable? The obvious choice is that some of the party members are noticed when the conflict comes to a close – so, in order to get the party through unnoticed, they need to win the conflict without having any compromises. Risky business! Another possibility, perhaps for a minor compromise, is that none of the party are noticed but the folk they were sneaking by are more alert now, or are alerted to the presence of the interloping party if not their exact number or locations.

Anyway, thoughts on this matter are appreciated!

I think this was discussed here as a Guard or Infiltrate conflict:

http://www.burningwheel.org/forum/showthread.php?14305-New-Conflict-Guard-or-Infiltrate&highlight=infiltrate

We actually tested this out in play and it worked really well. But of course we got caught…

Flee can already be used as Sneak Around (Attack: Scout, Defend: Health, Feint: Scout, Maneuver: Health). Also it would be great to retool it in accordance to the situation: sneaking around the forest? Scout and Survivalist. Sneaking around the dungeon? Scout and Dungeoneer. Sneaking past a moving army in the open? Scout and Pathfinder.

Some ideas for Minor Compromises:
[ul]
[li]The party ends up Hungry and Thirsty.
[/li][li]The party leaves clear signs that something had been sneaking around.
[/li][li]The party leaves a traceable trail that can be easily followed should they raise the alarm later on.
[/li][li]One of the party member loses/has to leave an item behind.
[/li][/ul]

Medium Compromises:
[ul]
[li]The party ends up Afraid.
[/li][li]One character member is detected and has to split up.
[/li][li]The party cannot sneak back the same road, they’ll have to try a different route.
[/li][li]The party must leave their backpacks/sacks behind.
[/li][/ul]

Major compromises:
[ul]
[li]One of the characters is captured.
[/li][li]The party successfully snuck, but now are completely lost/cornered.
[/li][li]The party raises the alarm, something clearly is sneaking around but they don’t know what it is, start a Flee conflict.
[/li][li]The party bumps into something, start a Fight/Capture conflict to silence it before it gets to raise the alarm. One character is still hidden and can choose to remain so, not taking part of the followup conflict.
[/li][li]
[/li][/ul]

Stay cool :cool:

@GroverBomb: Thanks for the link.

@DagaZ: I really like those compromises. They are tamer than what I was thinking, and very creative.

Yeah, my players’ whining must be warming me up.

But also I think one has to have a clear idea of the scope of the conflict, somewhat like Intent & Task in BW. Save the cruel outcomes for Kill conflicts. Also I’m noticing that giving all the party the Afraid condition is lethal. Trust me, I know from experience. It could change to:
[ul]
[li]One of the characters is left Afraid.
[/li][/ul]
Stay cool :cool:

One major compromise that I think is reasonable is that the majority of the party is spotted and a new conflict ensues – the guard want to capture them, the bandits want to kill them, etc., and the party must decide to flee or kill or what have you.

Remember that the players earn compromises when a (barely) successful conflict finishes, not a failed one. Gettin caught defeats the purpose of a successful Sneak Past conflict, I think.

Stay cool :cool:

I suppose that would be (might be) the case when GM wins then. Right on.

Although, it might be considered a major compromise if they are spotted just after they successfully sneak past…

That’s a good idea… They physically reach their goal, but the baddies are now in hot pursuit.