Table of Contents

Conflicts

Conflicts and opposed situation resolved by playing one or more Hands. Each Hand determines the outcome of one Action attempted by all participating Actors. Conflicts are used instead of Automatic Actions, when one Actor attempts to do something that is opposed by another Actor. A Conflict ends when the fiction says the objective is resolved, one side withdraws, or elimination occurs.

Conflict Terms

Stakes Calculation

Stakes is a single scaling number for an entire Conflict (not per Hand, not per Actor).
It represents the “table stakes” of the Conflict: when you sit down with dangerous opponents, everyone brings their best game.

Stakes Formula:
Stakes = (Highest Actor Rank) / 5 (1 minimum)

The GM computes Stakes secretly from statblocks (NPC Rank stays hidden) and announces only the Stakes level.

Stakes names

The Contract (Hook Points)

Each Hand follows the steps listed below in order. Extensions, if any are used, must plug in to one of these named steps. These steps are called the Contract:

No Extension may introduce special-case flowcharts that bypass the Contract. They must modify calculations at a named step.

Conflict Procedure

Each Hand follows these four steps, and their sub-steps, in order.


Step 1: Engagement

GM:

Under the Gun (UTG) Assignment

Design Intent:
UTG rotation prevents a single Actor from being mechanically disadvantaged throughout a multi-Hand Conflict.

UTG determines the first acting player during the Commit Aspect and Commit Action phases. This rule preserves narrative initiative without imposing a persistent mechanical disadvantage on one Actor.


Step 2: Commit Aspect

Beginning with the UTG Actor, each involved Actor:

  1. Pays the required ante determined by Stakes from one Attribute of their choosing into the Pot. The Attribute chosen must belong to the Aspect that will be played.
    • The ante token is placed face down into the pot.
    • Any Actor who cannot (or will not) ante is removed from the Conflict by Elimination (they retreat, surrender, fall back, lose their nerve, run out of leverage, etc.).
  2. Chooses and plays one face down Trine Aspect (TA) Card (Mind / Body / Spirit).
  3. States their intent (role-playing).
  4. States the target(s) of their Action (for purposes of determining Outcome & Damage)
  5. Everyone Reveals what Trine Aspect Card they played.
  6. Everyone Resolves Trine Dominance (TD) pairwise for each Actor and the Target of their Action, and counts each Actor’s TD Wins.

Pay the Ante Pot (random, no picking):


Step 3: Commit Action

Beginning with the UTG Actor, each involved Actor:

  1. Chooses and plays one face down Action Card (it lists the Attribute that must be Bid).
    • The Action Card must list an Attribute from the TA played in Step 2.
    • The Action must plausibly reflect their Statement of Intent from Step 2, after a post-reveal justification is made.
  2. Chooses how many Attribute tokens to commit as their Bid, and places those tokens on top of their cards.
    • Bid Cap: Your Bid may not exceed your current TS for the TA you played this Hand.
    • You also cannot bid more tokens than you physically have available in that required Attribute’s stack.
    • Bid tokens are normally played face down to bluff, but may be played face up to “chip bully.”
    • Bid tokens are removed from your chips stack when committed, and do not refresh until the end of the Hand (see Step 6).
    • (Optional) Play one Wildcard Token that adds +1 to the showdown total (does not count against the Bid cap).
  3. Everyone Reveals what Action Card they played and what Attribute Tokens were bid.
  4. After cards are revealed, each player may role-play one brief “justification line” to align the revealed Action with their Statement of Intent during Commit Aspect (see Table Culture Rules / Bluff Space Rule below).
  5. Resolve Attribute Dominance (AD) pairwise between each Actor and their Target(s) and calculate wins.
    • Check for a Sweep against each opponent (an Actor wins both TD and AD against that same opponent).

Step 4: Outcome

This “speed vs. power” order encourages strategic bidding: lower bids may strike first but with less raw force, while higher bids resolve later but leverage greater commitment. Bidding is therefore not always best at the maximum.

Everyone at the table follows the steps below to resolve the outcome of the Hand.

  1. Action Priority – Actions are resolved in ascending order of Bid size (lowest bid first).
    • The lower bidder’s Action resolves first (without considering Dominance bonuses).
    • The lower bidder’s damage (if any) applies unopposed — the opponent’s bid is not subtracted for this initial damage. Dominance bonuses apply to damage.
    • The higher bidder then resolves normally, calculating Margin using: (Bid + bonuses) − (opponent’s Bid + bonuses).
  2. For each opponent pair (Actor–>Target) calculate Margin:
    • Margin = (Winner Showdown Total) - (Loser Showdown Total)
    • Showdown Total = Bid + (Wildcard, if used) + (Stakes if TD win) + (Stakes if AD win) + (Sweep bonus, if applicable)
    • Higher Showdown Total wins and the Margin between Showdown Totals is Damage vs. the loser.
    • Loser Applies Damage to Attributes. Attacker Aspect determines Damaged Aspect (Mind damages Mind, Body damages Body, Spirit damages Spirit). Damaged Actor determines which Attribute(s) to spread damage among within the damaged Aspect. AVs cannot go below 0.
  3. Tokens bid in Step 3 that were not removed as Damage are returned to the Actor's chip stacks.
  4. Remove any Actors from the Conflict if all three Attributes in any one Aspect are 0.
  5. Continue to the next Hand, or end the Conflict immediately if the fiction says the objective is resolved (escape, surrender, withdrawal accepted, goal achieved, etc.), or if only one side remains willing/able to continue.

Table Culture Rules

Core Minimum Components

Bluff Space Rule Example: How Role-Playing Interleaves with a Hand

Player Statement of Intent:

  • Player's Actor: a Spanish duke in victorian clothing
  • Role-Play: the player impassionedly jumps on the table, loudly reciting a speech with waving hand gestures, that crescendos in, “and that is why I must run you through with this sword now…”
  • Hand Contract continues to Step 3 - Reveal
  • Player's brief justification of why his revealed cards were TA-Spirit, Action-Presence, Tag-Intimidate, rather than the expected TA-Body, Action-Strength (for a sword attack): “as a tense silence falls across the dining hall, I hold up a single finger and say, “but first I must take a sip of my tea before your untrained swordplay sweeps it off the table,” my eyes stare holes into my opponent as I slurp loudly.
  • GM: “ohhh that’s what you were doing. Clever.”

Takeaways: how Role-Playing created Bluff Space

  • Big theatrical declaration (everyone forms expectations)
  • Face-down commitments (tension)
  • Reveal is a surprise because the card's don't seem to match the Stated Intent
  • One-line justification reframes the scene without retconning it. Not “gotcha, I lied,” it’s “you assumed it was a duel—it was dominance.”
  • Also: that specific reveal is deliciously poker: TA Spirit says “this is about will and presence”, and PRE “Intimidate” says “I’m attacking your composure.”