Okay, so my group has been pushing hard on non-lethal options in the game… and rather than just constantly going with Defy Danger I came up with this custom move… help me stress test it before my next session?
Punching and Wrestling
When you attempt to subdue or deal non-lethal damage to an opponent within hand range, roll +STR. On a 10+ the opponent is either Staggered or Held, your choice. Or you can choose to Knock Out your opponent, but they will make an attack on you before you succeed. On a 7-9, deal your normal damage to your opponent (but you can choose to roll two dice and take the lower if you wish) and your opponent deals damage to you.
If your opponent is armed they will always deal damage to you even if you roll a 10+ (if you choose to knock them out, they deal an extra +1d6 damage on their attack).
Staggered opponents are dazed and groggy. Any attacks against them are at a +1 ongoing and they cannot perform any special moves for a few moments.
Held opponents are pinned or grappled in some way. Both you and your opponent are unable to defend yourselves from outside attacks and your opponent is unable to do anything save for attempt to break free. If your opponent attempts to break free, roll +CON. On a 10+, choose both and on a 7-9, choose 1:
* Avoid damage from your opponent
* Maintain the hold
That 10+ doesn’t feel like a 10+.
Can you unpack that? Is it too good or not good enough? Being able to roll+STR and basically pin or stun an opponent (or knock them out cold if you want to suffer a retributive strike) seems pretty strong to me.
Jim Crocker do you care to explain what in this is a “[sneaked] one-shot kill”?
I think what Jim means is that this move gives the PCs a chance to “take out” an opponent with a single roll, as a knocked out essentially leaves the opponent at the mercy of the PCs.
But they do so by opening themselves up to a move from that foe… but perhaps the Knock Out result is too much. I was hesitant on that one… I will definitely keep an eye on that one.
Compare it to Hack n’ Slash. You can open yourself up to an opponent’s move on a 10+ there as well; however, it gives you a mere +1d6, while your move takes the opponent out of combat for the same price.
As I said, I did have hesitation on the KO part. I’ll likely excise that, then.
Yeah, I like everything except the KO part.
This came up in our session last night and I just went with the stun rules as written. Once the character was stunned I figured it would make sense for further stunning to eventually render him unconscious. Your move provides something more concrete though. I think I’ll give it a try.
That’s an extremely verbose move, for what it’s trying to achieve. I’d go with something way simpler, like this:
When you wrestle with an opponent, roll +STR. On a 10+, choose 2. On a 7-9, choose 1.
* You pin them down.
* You deal your damage to them.
* They don’t deal their damage to you.
(Also, yeah, if I wanna knock someone out, I’m dealing my damage and saying something like “I feel his carotid artery under my thumb, and I squeeze tight.” If that brings him to 0HP, he’s unconscious.)
I do thank most everyone for the advice here… I really am trying to head off issues while creating a Move that has been following the fiction that my group is looking to create.
The reason this is so “Verbose” is that I want this to be a difficult choice for the players. Moves like what Peter Goderie put forth work (straight and to the point), but don’t recognize the issue I’m pointing at with this move: disabling someone through violence is hard… and you’re more likely to hurt them then you are to disable them. That’s why the 7-9 on this is “Deal damage” (with an option to try to reduce it)…
I’ll leave KO attempts for straight Defy Danger for now and see how this new move shakes out. Thanks for the help (and I’m still listening if people have stuff to say)!
Ahhh. Okay, sorry, I think I see now what you’re going for. I originally read the move as: “on a 10+, you subdue them. On a 7-9, you don’t necessarily subdue them, but you at least get to deal your damage, as a consolation prize.”
But reading over it again, it seems more like “on a hit, you subdue them. On a 7-9, it’s bloody.”
(I presume you can actually hold them or stagger them on a 7-9… or am I still confused?)
Sorry for the late response (work and all). What I meant by saying that the 10+ didn’t feel like a 10+ was it felt very limiting.
Powerful, but limiting. Total control is something very difficult to achieve in a wrestling match. When it gets that close, you gotta make some sacrifices.
I like Peter Goderie ‘s move. Simple, repeatable (with different and colorful results), and useful.
Having a player do “stun damage” to KO someone instead of kill them seems like an easy solution.
Maybe if they roll a 7-9 or fail they do full damage and kill the person. They just murdered a noble!!!
“Fesick, jog his memory”
“I think I jogged him too hard”
Yeah, jogging them too hard is a fun consequence that my move doesn’t cover. I was thinking “roll high to get more handy benefits,” when I think Joshua Chewning was aiming for “roll high to subdue them cleanly and without all those horrible consequences.”
And just ’cause I’m having fun:
When you try to physically subdue someone, roll +STR. On a 10+, they’re pinned, but choose 1. On a 7-9, they’re pinned, but choose 2.
* You hurt them far worse than you intended to.
* They fight back, dealing their damage to you.
* Your hold isn’t very secure. They could break free at any moment.