Thanks so much! I really wanted to write something where, instead of giving evocative pieces you can assemble towards a story, you have something that immediately becomes the gravity around which a story is told.
The +3 is important because you don't want the loop immediately countered but you also give players a powerful, if very situational, sentence so long as a token gets spent. I'm hoping that lends itself to big swings on the token spend.
I feel like not wanting to have a sentence countered is sort of antithetical to the spirit of the game? That's the way you refine it to its particulars.
It can still be powerful even as a +0 sentence, because you still would need a suitable Means to counter it - and even countering it don't end it, just stops it for a situation. And then the players/characters wouldn't necessarily have what they came to the Moon for, so they'll still have to come back in and re-engage with the situation.
(And if the goal is to permanently break the loop for everyone on the Moon, a +3 sentence only needs to be Countered 3 times before it's retired, vs at least 12 attempts if it's at +0.)
Hey Ben, thanks for the response. I think our design interests around Realis may simply have differences. I have played a lot of Realis over the last couple of years and was writing Tyde's sentences based on my experiences for how a short-run arc on a specific moon might play out. Moon sentences, in every game I've played, take a very long time to realize, and this is more designed with a shorter experience in mind (perhaps I need to add that to the description). It is very much on purpose that it only needs to be countered 3 times to be retired. You are of course free to run things your own way and break the limitations off to make a +0 if that's how you want to run it.
