When this enemy manipulates your mind so you think another member of your party is your sworn enemy you can either succumb to the spell or rebel against it. If you fight off the effect, roll+WIS. On a 10+ choose 1, on a 7-9 choose 2, on a 6- choose 2 in addition to what the GM says:
- It causes considerable mental pain, take 1d8 damage ignoring armor
- You gain the Confused debility
- You gain the Stunned debility
- You must concentrate, and open yourself up to attack, the GM will tell you how
If you succumb to the compulsion and attack your ally you both mark XP and you roll+Bond with them. On a 10+ choose two, on a 7-9 choose one, on a 6- the GM will choose one:
- You manage to call out a warning
- The effect ends immediately if you take damage
- The effect ends immediately if you deal damage to them
- The effect will end after about a minute
This move is a two-parter, where you roll one of two different sub-moves depending on your decision. When it comes to mind control moves I think it’s good to give players at least some control over it. With this move they get to decide whether the mind control even happens.
I’m stealing an idea I heard on the Discern Realities podcast about mind control, which is giving the players XP if they decide to play into it. I think it’s a cool little mechanic to nudge players into an interesting scene, even if their characters would probably be better off if they didn’t do it.
The negative options for the fight it off move could probably use some work, but I think they fit thematically pretty well. My worry is that they won’t be harsh enough and that everyone will always choose to fight it off. If that’s the case I could always increase the number you pick so 10+ is 2, 7-9 is 3, and 6- is GM choose 3.
I like the negative options on the succumb and attack submove in theory, but playtesting might reveal their flaws. My idea is that you can pick different ways to end the effect, but each one means someone different is likely to get hurt.