Author Topic: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers  (Read 3655 times)

Offline Taran

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 9863
    • View Profile
    • Chip
The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« on: July 16, 2011, 06:38:37 PM »
I'm getting mixed up when adjudicating this stuff:

A goblin gets obliterated by the Wizard.  The Wizards ally turns to the other goblin and says, "I make a declaration that the goblin is shaken up by the death of his companion." (he wants to tag it for a +2 or for effect to have the goblin flee)

Is that a fair declaration, or would that be more like an Intimidation Maneuver?
Maybe it's an Empathy declaration to read the Goblins reaction to the death of his buddy?

Declarations on the scene are easy.  "I declare there's a root behind the goblin."

Can you tag declarations for effect?  "with my free tag, I think the goblin will trip over that root." (this would be a compel on the goblin)...

I've been kind of judging that if it makes sense that someone should be able to resist, then it's a maneuver.


Offline Haru

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5520
  • Mentally unstable like a fox.
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2011, 07:07:52 PM »
A maneuver changes things, a declaration does not. Therefore you can defend against a maneuver but not a declaration.

In the case of your goblin vs wizard scenario, I see 2 ways it could go:

1. The Goblin is actually shaken by the death of his companion. The wizard rolls empathy for "guessing and aspect" roll, not a declaration, to discover the aspect that is already there. (YS113)

2. The first goblin is obliterated, and the wizard tags the "lump of goblin" aspect this left on the scene to help with his intimidation roll against the other goblin. This would be a maneuver to put the "shaken with fear" aspect on the goblin which he could then tag for effect.

A declaration can be something that has always been there, but it wasn't important until this very moment. Character aspects should never be declarations, they are either forced on the character by a maneuver or they are discovered with an assessment/guessing action. You could for example declare, that the old man in front of you hasn't used his shotgun in a while, giving it the aspect "rusted", but you would not be able to declare "untrained" on the old man. Of course, if the man has an aspect like "gun nut", the declaration of the rusted shotgun could simply fail by veto of the GM.
“Do you not know that a man is not dead while his name is still spoken?”
― Terry Pratchett, Going Postal

Offline UmbraLux

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1685
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #2 on: July 16, 2011, 07:37:19 PM »
I'm getting mixed up when adjudicating this stuff:

A goblin gets obliterated by the Wizard.  The Wizards ally turns to the other goblin and says, "I make a declaration that the goblin is shaken up by the death of his companion." (he wants to tag it for a +2 or for effect to have the goblin flee)

Is that a fair declaration, or would that be more like an Intimidation Maneuver?
Maybe it's an Empathy declaration to read the Goblins reaction to the death of his buddy?
As Haru mentioned, Declarations are the establishment of a pre-existing fact.  Maneuver are a change to existing facts.  So your example should be a maneuver.

See here for details.

Quote
Declarations on the scene are easy.  "I declare there's a root behind the goblin."

Can you tag declarations for effect?  "with my free tag, I think the goblin will trip over that root." (this would be a compel on the goblin)...

I've been kind of judging that if it makes sense that someone should be able to resist, then it's a maneuver.
Yes, you get a free tag on any aspect set up by a roll, whether Assessment, Declaration, or Maneuver.
--
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.”  - Albert Einstein

"Rudeness is a weak imitation of strength."  - Eric Hoffer

Offline Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12405
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #3 on: July 16, 2011, 08:25:42 PM »
I use a different definition of Declaration. If it creates something new and does not require an action in a conflict, its a Declaration.

So your first example would fly in my game. Declarations make great circumstance modifier-stand-ins.

Any time a player exerts "plot control", that's a Declaration. So you can Declare that the cops suspect so and so for this or that crime. For me, the part about pre-existing-ness only applies when it makes sense. So if you make that cop suspicion declaration while committing the crime in question, it works.

Offline UmbraLux

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1685
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #4 on: July 16, 2011, 08:52:43 PM »
I use a different definition of Declaration. If it creates something new and does not require an action in a conflict, its a Declaration.

So your first example would fly in my game. Declarations make great circumstance modifier-stand-ins.
I'll stick with the book definition.  At least partially because it avoids issues with resisting rolls. 

Declarations aren't typically resisted, Assessments and Maneuvers are when directed against an entity.  If you turned the example maneuver around on a PC, I'd want the chance to resist being shaken by an ally's death. 

You can, of course, house rule it any way you want.  The book rules simply work well for me.  :)
--
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.”  - Albert Einstein

"Rudeness is a weak imitation of strength."  - Eric Hoffer

Offline Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12405
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #5 on: July 16, 2011, 09:04:58 PM »
It isn't actually a houserule. By my reading of pages 20, 116, 196, and 313 of YS, it's just a rule.

So it's either a valid interpretation or an outright mistake.

(Granted, I'll houserule it if it turns out to be a mistake.)

There is room for interpretation though. Probably deliberately.

Offline UmbraLux

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1685
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #6 on: July 16, 2011, 09:14:36 PM »
It isn't actually a houserule. By my reading of pages 20, 116, 196, and 313 of YS, it's just a rule.
I think Fred made it fairly clear on the link above.  As for the book, YS116 states declarations are "perception and knowledge" based.

Shrug, doesn't matter much to me though...personally you could lump Assessments, Declarations, and Maneuvers into one thing and simply call it aspect creation.  :)
--
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.”  - Albert Einstein

"Rudeness is a weak imitation of strength."  - Eric Hoffer

Offline Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12405
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #7 on: July 16, 2011, 10:15:04 PM »
Yeah, I subscribe to the Death Of The Author theory.

If it's not in the book, it's just an opinion.

Too much hassle otherwise.

Also, the book uses "X drops dead of a heart attack" as an example of a bad Declaration. Therefore, that qualifies as a Declaration.

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #8 on: July 16, 2011, 10:19:36 PM »
Sanctaphrax's definition still works when taking that link into account. It's still a fact external to the character, that the character is the only one to catch on to. It's all just different readings of the same material and it works both ways. I'd be inclined to run it like Sanctaphrax, because I like to encourage my players to take control of the story.

Character aspects should never be declarations, they are either forced on the character by a maneuver or they are discovered with an assessment/guessing action. You could for example declare, that the old man in front of you hasn't used his shotgun in a while, giving it the aspect "rusted", but you would not be able to declare "untrained" on the old man. Of course, if the man has an aspect like "gun nut", the declaration of the rusted shotgun could simply fail by veto of the GM.

Actually you can make declarations that are character specific. One of the examples that they use in the book is that of a thug having a bad knee. Of course these kind of aspects are a little more risky as the GM is a little more likely to have an image in mind of what they are and is thus more likely to tell you no. A PC is the only time I would agree with you. I have always felt that a player's control over their character is sacrosanct, so declarations by others about their character are strictly controlled by the player.

A goblin gets obliterated by the Wizard.  The Wizards ally turns to the other goblin and says, "I make a declaration that the goblin is shaken up by the death of his companion." (he wants to tag it for a +2 or for effect to have the goblin flee)

Is that a fair declaration, or would that be more like an Intimidation Maneuver?
Maybe it's an Empathy declaration to read the Goblins reaction to the death of his buddy?

I'd say it could be either, and it's up to you (the GM) to make that call. Do you think the goblin would be shaken? If not then make the declaration difficulty high, or say no and tell them it's an intimidation maneuver.

Can you tag declarations for effect?  "with my free tag, I think the goblin will trip over that root." (this would be a compel on the goblin)...

A declaration is an aspect. It can be used in any way an aspect can be used. There's some debate as to whether a tag can be used for a compel (even within evil hat, as I have heard different things from different developers), but the short answer is yes...kinda.

I've been kind of judging that if it makes sense that someone should be able to resist, then it's a maneuver.

There are maneuvers that are unresisted though. Scene maneuvers (like flipping a light switch) are usually against a difficulty set by the GM. The rule of thumb I usually use is "Is a character acting to create an advantage (Flipping a light switch, scaring a goblin), or are they taking advantage of an existing situation (the scene is dark, the goblin is scared)?" The maneuvers are a little more reliable because the character is acting to make it so, but declarations take less effort to use. And of course this is all up to the GM to decide whether the declaration is appropriate (IS the scene dark?) or whether the character needs to act to make it so.

Offline UmbraLux

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1685
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #9 on: July 16, 2011, 11:00:14 PM »
I'd be inclined to run it like Sanctaphrax, because I like to encourage my players to take control of the story.
You realize that's like saying "I want a VW Bug instead of a Vette because I want a car.

Whether used as declaration or maneuver, it's still giving players authorial control. 
--
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.”  - Albert Einstein

"Rudeness is a weak imitation of strength."  - Eric Hoffer

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #10 on: July 16, 2011, 11:11:33 PM »
Actually the better analogy (unless I misunderstand the argument) is that I want a Vette instead of a beetle because I want more car. I want more player control, therefore I expand the amount of leeway declarations have.

Offline UmbraLux

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1685
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #11 on: July 16, 2011, 11:31:11 PM »
Meh, getting off subject here but the point wasn't that one car was better than the other - it was that both were cars.  Just as both Declarations and Maneuvers give players authorial control.  Personally, I don't think one gives more control than the other...the difference is simply what or how you're applying the control.  And, as I said previously, it's a fairly meaningless distinction.  It's just a way to create an aspect that someone decided to split into categories and wrap in specific terminology.   ;)
--
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.”  - Albert Einstein

"Rudeness is a weak imitation of strength."  - Eric Hoffer

Offline noclue

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 333
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #12 on: July 17, 2011, 04:07:28 AM »
Seems to me the main consideration is not whether you call it a declaration or a maneuver, but whether you want to make it an opposed roll, and whether you want to let a tag make the goblin flee.

To create the aspect I'd allow empathy, makes sense. The goblin would resist with conviction (mental fortitude). If the PC wins, he "notices" the goblin was shaken up and can tag it.

Allowing a tag for effect to make the goblin flee is another matter. That would completely depend on context and the importance  of the goblin in the scene.

(Edit: scare quotes added)
« Last Edit: July 17, 2011, 05:17:41 PM by noclue »

Offline Haru

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5520
  • Mentally unstable like a fox.
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #13 on: July 17, 2011, 09:58:12 AM »
Actually you can make declarations that are character specific. One of the examples that they use in the book is that of a thug having a bad knee. Of course these kind of aspects are a little more risky as the GM is a little more likely to have an image in mind of what they are and is thus more likely to tell you no. A PC is the only time I would agree with you. I have always felt that a player's control over their character is sacrosanct, so declarations by others about their character are strictly controlled by the player.

I believe this scene was about maneuvers and giving your free tag to other players, so the "Bad Knee" was a maneuver aspect, not a declaration. I can't find it anywhere in the book at the moment, so if you know where it is, I please tell.

But especially things like this, I would always treat them as a maneuver. Otherwise the player could get away with declaring anything, and he could put aspects on everything and would be unchallenged while doing so. On the other hand, I would probably allow certain declarations on bystanders. They are primarily there to color the scene, so their plot value is not much more than that of a table or a chair in the room. On opposing NPCs or PCs I would not allow direct declarations.
“Do you not know that a man is not dead while his name is still spoken?”
― Terry Pratchett, Going Postal

Offline Set Abominae

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 125
  • Give us a kiss.
    • View Profile
Re: The Line between declarations and Maneuvers
« Reply #14 on: July 17, 2011, 05:46:50 PM »
No, ma'am. We at the FBI do not have a sense of humor we're aware of. May we come in?