Structural Updates

Hello my lovely witches,

I've been dreaming of a physical edition of The Mending Circle for a while now but I've always felt the game needed some improvements before it was ready for it. I'm incredibly proud of the game and I think it does a really good job at what it set out to do. But I am a very critical creative and I've carried two points of criticism with me for a while now:

1. If the players don't pay attention the scenes might stretch out and the story might meander a bit
2. Setting up the story with the Augury can be a lot of fun but also take up multiple hours

Neither one of these things is in bad by themselves. However I want the game to enable stories that can be started and played in a single evening of 3-4 hours. And in that light, both more focused scenes and an accelerated setup process will help get to the game there. So I've decided to start looking more closely at these issues to try and come up with some changes to get the game closer to its best shape.

And today I want to present to you a possible approach, to the first issue:

Active Scenes

The Weaver not only opens the scene but also has the responsibility to close the scene. They have to pay attention to when the scene's central question was answered and wrap things up accordingly. That means they'll basically have the first and last word of their scene.

• Previously "ending a scene" was not codified and the responsibility wasn't clear
• The design idea is that with one player keeping an eye on "when to end a scene", scenes are closed a little more consciously and also a little earlier.

Scene Count

There are at most a total of 13 active scenes (not counting montages). After the end of the 13th scene, if the Torn wasn't fully healed, then the calamity comes to pass. However for each healed Gap on the Wound Sigil the players (starting with the next Weaver) get to add a "...but" to the calamity. ("...but rift between Jin and Sable will be mended eventually" "...but fewer people are affected..."). This gives us a sort of gradient of loss, or partial victories, which feels important for a game that is so positive.

• Previously there was no limit on the number of scenes so stories could just go on forever
• The design idea is that 13 scenes is plenty (that's over 4 scenes for each Gap) and should rarely be an actual limit. However with a limit in mind people are more conscious of the "resource" scene and use it in a more economical and efficient way in regards to their story.

Montages

Montages now seek to answer the question "How does the Torn...?" and they are fixed to four snapshots, each one spaced apart by a  significant amount of time (think days, weeks or even months). The Weaver begins with the first snapshot, followed by the other two players (in order) and finally closes with the fourth snapshot, thus mirroring the opening and closing of Active Scenes.

• Previously montages could go on as long as everyone at the table wanted them to and their central question was much more open-ended ("Will the Torn...?")
• The design idea is that now they are much more focused on showing the passage of time. Moving them from an uncertain ("Will the Torn...?") to a certain result ("How does the Torn...?") might make them tighter, which is supported by the fixed number of snapshots to show, each of which is spaced a significant time apart.

And that's the current first draft for problem number 1. If you have some play experience with the game, I'd love your thoughts. And if you're planning to run a session soon, why not give these variant rules a try! I'd love to hear your thoughts. And if you're curious, stay tuned for a post about problem number 2 - published whenever I have an (at least) solid approach to the problem.

Until then, my darlings,

💜 Martin