Stefan (Hygelak’s player) just asked me about a new mechanism to set obstacles for tests. As tests are negotiated in Burning Wheel, he proposed that one might allow to lower the obstacle as a tradeoff for more dire consequences of failure. For example, consider the following situation:
Hygelak wants to use his Oratory (task) in order to instigate a riot in the streets of Arcadia that will cause enough of a distraction for the group to break into a nearby building without being noticed by the guards (intent). The GM decides that failure in this test results in a riot that will be dispersed very quickly on the guards’ first movement so that the heroes will be caught in the act when they leave the house some minutes later. The obstacle to cause an uprising in the peaceful citizens of Arcadia is set to 5.
Now Hygelak offers to raise the stakes: For a -1 Ob, he is willing to accept that upon failure out of all the houses surrounding the market place, the rioting mob decides to set fire to the very house into which the group has broken.
I’m not sure whether or not this is a good idea. On the one hand this basically means complications for which there already is a mechanism in Burning Wheel, although there is an important difference: Modifying the obstacle does not only affect the chances to realize the stated intent, it might also affect advancement because a challenging test might become difficult and a difficult test might become routine. That way, the player gains momentum to drive the advancement of his character’s skills in the way he wants by offering new complications and story twists – possibly.
And that’s why I am uncertain about this rule: Complications as defined by Burning Wheel allow the character to achieve the stated intent even though he has failed his test. This is a boon that allows the player to ensure the plot goes in the direction intended by him – even if only indirectly because of the upcoming complications. This mechanic has also to be fueled by artha.
The “Raising the Stakes” mechanic as presented by Stefan is another beast: The obstacle is lowered before it is clear whether or not the complications take effect, and then you gain the additional benefit of possibly shifting difficulty categories in your own favor. At the very least, this should be another artha burner.
I also feel that granting bonus dice would be more in line with the existing mechanics as obstacles are forever only raised by the circumstances, never lowered. Anything that goes in the actor’s favor essentially manifests as bonus dice.
Unfortunately, artha dice don’t count towards advancement, so if you pay a fate point to raise the stakes and gain a bonus die by accepting graver consequences of failure, you don’t get the momentum concerning controlled advancement as described above. You just improve your odds to succeed at what you’re doing which can also be done by the regular complications mechanism that would actually be more powerful (which is why I wrote “fate point” above).
So I guess, I will try this option in our next session although I remain sceptical.