Barf Forth Apocalyptica
barf forth apocalyptica => Apocalypse World => Topic started by: help im a bug on December 08, 2011, 07:04:11 PM
-
In my current AW game, one PC (Tak, the chopper) manipulated the NPC doctor (Brace Win) who was taking care of another PC (Pandora, the touchstone) into, basically, roofie-ing Pandora. I handled this by telling Pandora's player to un-highlight all her stats, then highlight Hot.
This seems to me like a cool mechanical way to model drugs and other behavior-modifying effects on the PCs, kind of like how Psi-harm can change a threat's type (we used that to change an ally from a representative to a lover as well).
Just wondering if anyone else has messed with mechanics that involve the highlighting or un-highlighting of stats, and how they worked out.
I don't think Pandora ended up actually rolling Hot for the rest of that session, thinking about it.
-
This may take things away from the topic you posted. Ignore at will.
I'm a little confused. Hot is what Pandora would role to manipulate others, right? If she's roofied shouldn't she be more susceptible to being manipulated?
-
I mighta chosen to highlight Cool instead ('cause your judgment is all fucked up) AND I really really like this idea!
Cool :)
-
I'm a little confused. Hot is what Pandora would role to manipulate others, right? If she's roofied shouldn't she be more susceptible to being manipulated?
Yes, but as the MC never rolls dice it should mean that the PC is trying to get the character into situations where Hot is needed.
That's how I read it anyways!
-
I would ruled she was hit with some serious s-harm. Act under fire to say "no". Or maybe drugging her was the leverage in seduce/manipulate, instead of "I'll do X for you if you do Y for me" it's "Do Y for me because you know, your judgement is a bit clouded".
-
It feels like folks don't really understand what getting rufied means.
It means you're out of it, not remembering shit, and quite susceptible to being taken advantage of, or raped.
The... idea that a character in such a state should be encouraged to engage in sexual activity is pretty creepy.
This is why I suggested Cool instead. That way the emphasis is on having a hard time doing stuff, rather than on being sexy and manipulative (again, creepy in this context..)
-
I feel like the interesting question isn't "how can we best model getting roofied?", but rather "What does re-highlighting stats best model?"
-
I perceive highlighting as OOC cues as to what other players would like my character to do, so the idea of redo-ing the highlighting due to IC actions seems off to me.
How about a short-lived "instead of rolling X, roll Y when you <move>" effect?
-
To me, highlighting is a totally out-of-fiction comment along the lines of "Hey, you should do more of this" or "It'd be cool if you paid more attention to this".
But is there some element to it that models something within the fiction?
-
To me, highlighting is a totally out-of-fiction comment along the lines of "Hey, you should do more of this" or "It'd be cool if you paid more attention to this".
But is there some element to it that models something within the fiction?
Ooh, that's an interesting thought. I mean, it is somewhat related to the fiction because it's your Hx that decides which player gets to highlight a stat of yours. Also the Quarantine can, through in-fiction events, wind up with Weird permanently highlighted.
-
That's true. I suppose what makes me think these things aren't connected well/clearly is how they work together:
- how harshly do/should folks enforce attributing the +1Hx at the end of each session? It seems to largely function as a "<3 love ya!" device, given that play does not explicitly tackle the subject of "a character who knows you better than they used to".
Oh, damn it, I just realized I've been doing it backward. You decide who knows *you* better. You give the +1Hx to someone else. Argh.
-
Don't forget you can instead choose someone who knows you worse, and give them a -1.
-
Wasn't the Hx-1 from the playtest version and left out in the final, published version ? I can't find it anywhere in the book.
-
Page 179, Experience.
-
Ah, you're right. And it says p. 207 that you can, if you want, give -1Hx ("it's acceptable").
The basic move as expressed pp. 88 and 207 and in the players' playbook don't, though. I think I'll stick wih the +1Hx only until a player REALLY wants to give a minus.