Barf Forth Apocalyptica
barf forth apocalyptica => Apocalypse World => Topic started by: DWeird on December 22, 2012, 04:04:46 PM
-
You might know about my earlier attempt at a playbook, the Abacus, who was a kind of stealthy hitman type. That one failed to take off - mostly because no one, including myself, was able to point at what exactly the playbook was supposed to be doing.
Well, now I've redone it completelly. Instead of being a cool loner assassin type, instead he's now basically a middle manager - a guy who is all about social leverage and the inability to use it gracefully.
You will find yourself caring a lot more about where and how barter is flowing, and you will be very capable of putting other people into trouble while remaining relativelly safe yourself. You lack the ability to have a "final say" in matters, though, and things ought to get away from you unless you take care of various troublesome details well in advance.
You can play post-apoc middlemanagers, loan sharks, dealers and brokers with him.
Inspirations were the Wolf from Pulp Fiction, Buddy from Swimming with Sharks, Fennyman from Shakespear in love, and my own burning inner desire to make a jerk playbook that doesn't screw the other characters.
Names:
Joe, Gray, Moss, Pierce, Case, Jules, Mirth, Rain.
Adams, Bach, Carter, Evans, Young, Thomas, White, Price.
QED, Once, Boss's Man, Mirror, Thirteen, Pi, Carver.
Looks:
Man, Woman, or concealed.
Formal wear, vintage wear, casual wear, signature wear, or luxe wear.
Concealed face, sharp face, stern face, fat face or forgettable face.
Deep eyes, dead eyes, calculating eyes, wise eyes, weary eyes.
Tall body, wiry body, pudgy body, crippled body, hard body.
Stats:
Cool+2 Hard-1 Hot-2 Sharp+2 Weird+1
Cool+2 Hard0 Hot-1 Sharp+1 Weird+1
Cool+2 Hard+1 Hot0 Sharp+1 Weird-1
Cool+2 Hard+1 Hot+1 Sharp-1 Weird0
Abacus's network -
By default, your network costs 2-barter maintenance per session and provides you with services as per your professional agreement. Missing payments means no more service, no more respect. Pick two:
* You've got a rare contact (maybe Milk) for something luxe or rare, like weapons, drugs or transportation.
* You've got two no-nonsense enforcers (maybe Vega and Ezekiel).
* You've got an understanding with the local warlord (maybe Jonathan) that you're the gatekeeper of something necessary, like food, medicine, or gear.
* You've got a front or a patsy (maybe Quentin).
* You've got cachet and an envoy (maybe Trigger) with the distant looming threat (maybe Greer's gang).
Moves:
Pick two:
In the pocket - at the beggining of a session, roll +cool. On a 10+, hold 2. On a 7-9, hold 1. Spend your hold 1 for 1 to have someone in your network make a move for you as if you were there to do it.
Swimming with sharks - if whoever's in charge around here owes you, you can cash in the debt to use +sharp instead of +hard to aggro, using their retribution as a weapon.
Options - you can spread 1 barter around once per session, getting 1 extra hold any time you get hold for the rest of the session.
Keeping tabs - you can read the sitch regarding anything you spent barter on, even if you're not there.
Served cold - when using time and manpower to pursue someone, roll +cool. On a hit, hold 3. On a 7-9, hold 1. Spend hold 1 for 1 throughout your pursuit to:
* Find the least loyal member of their group.
* Trap, imprison them or remove an escape route.
* Put something left unprotected in danger.
* Hide something important or dangerous in plain view.
Special:
When you have sex with someone, either you get 1 hold on them or they get 1 hold on your network as per In the pocket rules, their choice.
Advancement: The usual, details pending, plus:
Retire as a threat.
Cool+3.
You also get some unimpressive weaponry to start with, and a whopping 5 barter. Improvements might get you a small hold or a moonlighting crew, both of which will benefit from the Network move.
-
I like it! At first I felt it might be a bit too similar to the operator, but the key difference I think is that even though something is always in the works, you're never the one getting his hands dirty. You've got your leverage evenly dispersed in enough places to have a little bit of control over most situations you'll walk into. Now that I think of it it's just the opposite of the operator! You're the guy arranging the shitty jobs and taking the nicer cut.
-
Very interesting, espeically how the transfer of barter is highlighted. I think, however, that the maintanence cost of the Network a bit high, as after that inital supply of barter run out, the Abacus seem to have no way of earning new barter through moves, and must rely on the narrative to aquire it. Lowering the maintanence to 1-barter would allow the Abacus to spend newly aquired barter on other things, such as bribes or Options, rather than pay an upkeep cost. I think that otherwise, a lot of game time will be spent trying to to cajole others to give the Abacus barter, rather than shift barter around different parties.
EDIT: Did someone say middle management? (http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7h29sazeY1r0adb0o1_1280.jpg)
-
Thanks for the interest! An Abacus is definitelly a 'nicer cut' kind of guy, and the comparison to Badger is quite apt (as both the menacing first episode material and the comedic relief of later ones).
As for the maintenance cost... I wanted money, employment and bartering to matter when the Abacus is in play. AW doesn't have terribly good tools for that as far as I'm concerned - in every game I've played, barter was mostly handled off-screen if at all.
Moves that give you barter wouldn't make you care about it - you only really ever care about things you don't have. The 2-barter maintenance cost is kind of steep, but it makes the Abacus's player care about the in-fiction flows of goods very much. I hope so at least! And I'd rather err on the side of too much for playtest purposes .
-
Hey, D!
I like this, especially the concept.
I like the steep cost of maintenance, too. However, I agree that, reading through the playbook, it's really not clear how the Abacus is supposed to make money (presumably that's why he's brokering all these deals, right?). It might be very helpful to make it a little more clear. I think you have ideas in your head, but someone reading the playbook could easily go, "Huh? What do I do now?"
It could be a playbook move, or a peripheral move (kind of like the barter moves AW has already), or something baked into the Hx choices or set up when you pick your options for your network.
I also find the wording on many of your moves confusing, but I'll try reading them again later, maybe it's just my brain misfiring.
The concept is really killer, though.
-
Hey Paul! Merry Christmas!
Currently, I'm thinking organized extortion, a cut of deals made, and constant employment as some kind of accountant. I'm figuring maybe a simple "Barter" section, like in the other 'books, would do for getting that accross. Then again, who really reads those...
Hm.
What if I gave the Abacus a ledger full of people who owe him, as stuff? If he runs out of money... He goes aknocking on other people's doors, which could be interesting.
Not fully sure yet.
Oh, and yeah! Definitelly tell me what's not clear with the moves.
-
I'm not sure how "keeping tabs" works in practice.
I like the concept very much, but I feel like the playbook has too much sweet and not enough sour, if you know what I mean. Maybe the player should also pick a couple of dangling threads that he needs to take care of in play, the way the Hardholder has to pick some vulnerabilities at chargen.
(This is a really genius part of the game, IMO -- during the first session, you choose to have your Hardholder character be paying tribute to Spikey, a warlord from across the bay, hoping that the MC will forget about him. Three sessions later, you're sacrificing all your principles and friends in an attempt to put Spikey's head on a stick.)
Also, I notice that there are no rules whatsoever for the Abacus' boss. Is that just the Creative Void right there? Because most characters whose livelihoods are dependent on complicated outside groups of NPC's like the Hardholder, the Operator, and the Hocus have to roll every session to see how things are going and that roll can make their life easy or hard.
Maybe the Abacus should have a "Boss roll" every session to see if the boss is happy with him or not -- it doesn't even have to have any mechanical impact, just knowing in the fiction that the boss is pissed off, or suspicious, or jealous, would be very interesting. Maybe he blames you for having those people killed, even though he was the one who said they needed to be killed in the first place.
-
Keeping tabs means you've got an ear out for things you bought or invested in. The Abacus is positioned as a well-connected person, so you can bring in NPCs to convey the information.
Abacus is not likely to get much in terms of things that fuck him, network-wise. Unlike a Hardholder (who's a boss or authority) or a Hocus (who's a center of a cult) or a Chopper (who's, well, pack alpha), an Abacus is nothing special on his own. What makes an Abacus an Abacus is that he has access to all these different important, useful people. Losing that access hurts the player of an Abacus more than missing a Wealth or Fortunes roll does. Plus, I think that particular mechanic (barter on hit, trouble on miss) has seen plenty of use already.
Mechanically, an Abacus is more like a Gunlugger or Skinner than a Hardholder or Operator, really.
Anyway. I get the general concern. My plan is to make the Abacus not need so much 'sour' on his sheet by making the Abacus *be* the sour, if that makes any sense. I'll try to relay this with Hx and they ways he gets his barter.
For example. You probably know how, if you have a Gunlugger in your game, the profile of your NPCs changes - even if you're a player who's NOT a Gunlugger, you're far more likely to deal with violence from other NPCs?
An Abacus should have a similar effect, only with abusive, organized gain-orientated social relationships instead of violence. With the added effect that the Abacus is far more likely to be on the initiating end of a relationship that hurts another PC or NPC they care about.
So, basically, as an Abacus you have to make your own trouble, but that's easy because you're very good at making trouble for others.
-
I have AW in the queue to run after my current Monsterhearts game, I'll see if anyone wants to play the Abacus and see how it works in practice.
-
I'm a newbie to AW, so I don't feel confident enough yet to give an opinion about the Abacus' concept, other than the different feeling it gives, which is a good thing for me.
I don't quite get the move Swimming with sharks, though. What would be the harm inflicted if the target chooses to force your hand? Wouldn't it be better to use the move in manipulation rolls, rather than when going aggro?
-
Cool! I'll try to get this guy up to spec faster, then.
Here's some gear & Hx.
In addition to your network, you get:
* 1 failsafe weapon.
* Oddments worth 5-barter.
* Fashion suitable to your look, including at your option a piece worth 1-armor (you detail).
Failsafe weapons:
* .38 revolver (2-harm close reload loud)
* 9mm (2-harm close loud)
* antique handgun (2-harm close reload loud valuable)
* shotgun (3-harm close messy)
* machette (3-harm hand messy)
On your turn (choose however many you want):
One of them owes you for services rendered. Tell that player Hx+2.
One of them owes you, because you said so. Tell that player Hx+2.
Tell everyone else Hx-1. You don't advertise - unless you do, in which case tell everyone Hx+1.
On the others' turns:
One of them has refused you access to their assets or is disrupting a profitable venture. Whatever number that players tells you, ignore it and write down Hx+3 next to their character name instead.
Everyone else, whatever number they tell you, add +1 to it and write it next to their character's name. You stay informed.
-
Vondas - a fair complaint!
I don't want to use manipulation for it because it's not bluffing - if you refuse an Abacus or his agent, well, the local toughs are going to have a field day with you. In fact, direct access thugs is the only new thing the move adds - you could manipulate people using your powerful friends as leverage before this.
Still, go aggro doesn't really do "violence will inevitably come some time later", so I guess I need a rephrase?
Swimming with sharks - if whoever's in charge around here owes you, you can cash in the debt to use +sharp instead of +hard to aggro, using part of their gang as a weapon.
So it's now your job to make sure there are gang members around you if it's a highly fictionally detailed situation. Better?
-
Hey, cool.
Merry Christmas to you too!
Those Hx options really help situate the character and give us some clues as to what the character is supposed to do in play.
I think you should go back to your idea of people as "stuff" in the network: choose certain people who owe you, and maybe someone who you owe but can't afford to pay (you owe them something unusual or out of your reach maybe). That has lots of potential!
I reread all the moves... and I still find them really confusing.
For example:
"Special:
When you have sex with someone, either you get 1 hold on them or they get 1 hold on your network as per In the pocket rules, their choice."
What? So if the Abacus has sex with me, I can choose to give him one hold (the first choice), which he can use to make me make a move for him "as though he were there to do it"?
Does that mean mind control? Can I refuse? Who makes the roll? Using which character's stats?
The second choice means I get to use their network to make a move, ok, that's clearer. I have a feeling that might get weird in play, but I'm willing to try it.
"Options - you can spread 1 barter around once per session, getting 1 extra hold any time you get hold for the rest of the session."
Here, "spread around", means "spend", yes? I think it does.
That's a far-reaching effect! Very interesting move.
"Swimming with sharks - if whoever's in charge around here owes you, you can cash in the debt to use +sharp instead of +hard to aggro, using part of their gang as a weapon."
I'm having trouble seeing how this is triggered in the fiction. What does the character actually do?
Because if it means playing out talking to the dude who's in charge, getting them to agree to lend you their gang for a while, etc, that's more or less how it would normally play out in regular play (with no special moves).
It's also not super clear what to do if the person in charge isn't in debt to you, or doesn't care about repaying the debt.
Perhaps (and if I'm anywhere near even understanding the move correctly), it would be better to rephrase this as a modification of the "when you give someone 1-barter with strings attached" peripheral move. So, you can give whoever's in charge 1-barter, or cash in on an existing debt, in exchange for using part of their gang for a move.
Also, I think it might be cool to give the Abacus three choices from the network options to start with (with maybe the option that one of them has been disrupted or someone in trouble), kind of like how the Operator has two gigs and an obligation.
Since you don't get to expand your network very reliably later, I think three choices might make the character's life more interesting. But maybe two is fine!
-
I'll consider adding a PC version for In the pocket, that should solve most problems.
As is, I don't think the special is that problematic - either you fuck with the Abacus to use him, or you fuck him 'cause you like him, in which case he gets to use you. You get to choose whether or not the Abacus gets to use you, so you should generally be good with things he asks you to do.
Still, would this phrasing be any better?
In the pocket - at the beggining of a session, roll +cool. On a 10+, hold 2. On a 7-9, hold 1. Spend your hold 1 for 1 to have someone in your network act on prior orders or established duties and make a move on your behalf as if you were there to do it yourself.
You use the Abacus's stats. Ever had a job where you followed orders even where the task was pointless or counterproductive, using not your own best judgement, but your boss's? This is that.
Spread around in Options means 'spend', yeah. It also means that the target of the spending is not necessarily well-defined. I think one of the barter moves shares this usage, more or less with the meaning of "give a little to everyone."
Swimming with sharks is triggered with you threatening other people with gang members that are close enough in the fictional timespace.
So, if you threaten a farmer with violence and he tells you to fuck off, maybe you have like a week to have local toughs fuck him up.
If you're locked in the farmer's closet and he's sharpening his skinning knife, there has better be a bruiser within shouting distance.
Also, if you have Swimming with sharks, you immediatelly skip all of the steps that you'd normally have to take to do something similar with a regular character - actually convincing the harholder, actually convincing members of her gang, making them care about the exact worth of their debt to you, etc.
Also, the debt owed by the authority needn't be be barter. When I made most of the moves, I kept thinking how other playbooks could use them - in the case of Swimming with sharks, it's definitelly a move intented for Angels or Drivers, people who the authorities might be indebted to because of the valuable service they provide, not the money you lend them directly. You're important, is the thing - whether by providing healing, or transportation, or brokering deals for hard to get stuff. It's like being rich and white and calling for the police. So you could even get away with using the gang without the local authority's direct knowledge - only you'd lose face with them if it was something against their interests.
Does the above make the intended use of the move clear?
With that in mind, how about this phrasing:
Swimming with sharks - as long as you remain on good terms with whoever is in charge, you can roll +sharp instead of +hard to aggro, using members of their gang as a weapon.
The Abacus is going to get an option to get another Network options as advancement, maintenance-free. If I make the parts of Abacus's network a more uncertain gamble as you're proposing, I might give him a bigger list to choose from as well as more options, though.
-
Ah, yes, that's really helpful. Is there a way to bake some of that information into the move descriptions a little more clearly? As a reader/player, I could read through the move descriptions and totally miss out on some of that subtext.
(I guess the "swimming with sharks" move is like when you say, "Do you know who you're dealing with?" That makes sense now. So you're threatening someone, and the threat is getting roughed by the enforcers of whoever is in charge around here. I could almost see that being more of a "manipulate" move than "go aggro", though. Maybe a custom move would be even better?
Like, if they refuse, choose options, on a 10+, choose 2, on a 7-9, choose 1:
* The local enforcers will play the marimba on this fucker's bones
* It won't take them a good long while to get around to it
* You don't cause a problem for whoever's in charge as a result
That sucks, but you get the idea.)
-
Subtext is hard! Especially since the volume of text is an issue.
If it's any help, if you're playing the Abacus, imagine you're this guy (because I do):
(http://news.doddleme.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/mad-men-logo.jpg)
I don't watch Mad Men, mind, so I'm working solely off the image. I wouldn't be surprised if the show supports the archetype I'm aiming for, though.
Anyway, regarding Swimming with sharks... I don't know. It's not that different from using your own gang as a weapon, is it? I'm sure I'm stretching go aggro a bit, but not by much. I'll leave it as is, phrasing aside, until someone who played it tells me it doesn't work.
-
The advantage of my way is just clarity. The disadvantage is space/word count.
My concern is just that, reading your text, I'm not sure what it means. Surely I won't be the only one?
But, yeah, it's worth a try! I might just be slow or something.
-
One of them has refused you access to their assets or is disrupting a profitable venture. Whatever number that players tells you, ignore it and write down Hx+3 next to their character name instead.
Everyone else, whatever number they tell you, add +1 to it and write it next to their character's name. You stay informed.
I like all of this except the last bit, which seems to forcing the player's hand in the current time. Lots of existing playbooks set up antagonism by referring to past events, which adds spice, but this wording implies that Bob the Savvyhead is deliberately screwing with you, regardless of what Bob's player thinks.
It might be better to put it as the Abacus thinks this character is deliberately screwing with him, or simply say something like, "One of them has skills, access or resources that are essential to your enterprise, and knows it..."
That way, there's immediate tension there because the Abacus' player has to make himself vulnerable to another player character, right off, but we get to find out in play what happens -- maybe the Abacus puts a lot of energy into finding alternative sources for his widgets, or maybe the Savvyhead makes the Abacus solve all his problems for him. Either way it's interesting.
-
Paul - I'm not gonna lie, I'm secretly hoping that my words flow like a magnificient rainbow and you're just too awestruck to see their majestic beauty clearly.
But yeah. There is actually an important reason why I want to keep the 'go aggro' phrase in there.
Let me begin with an example. Compare:
You're a Gunlugger. Before you is a gang of bikers, along with their leader. They attack you.
You're a Gunlugger. Before you is a gang of bikers lead by a Chopper. He goes aggro on you using his gang, and they attack you.
Which one registers as something that would matter more, in the context of AW?
In AW, there is a PC way of doing things and a NPC way of doing things. The NPC way of doing things generally crumples when it gets in the way of PCs. Mostly this doesn't matter because who really cares about NPCs, right? But this matters for cases where the NPCs are part of a player's ability. If a PC has an ability that gets a bunch of aggressive NPCs on another PC, but does not take away at least part of the players right to initiative, it'll be a NPC-like move in it's effectiveness.
My worry is that if an Abacus uses a move with your phrasing, it'll be like:
"Hey, Driver, a bunch of dudes show up to beat you up, like the Abacus said they would." "I run them over. *dice rattle*"
As compared to:
"Hey, Driver, a bunch of dudes sent by the Abacus have just beat you up. What do you do?"
So it's not just clarity that's at stake, it's the question of mechanical bite as well. Phrasing the move in terms of go aggro lets the Abacus get some of that bite at least some of the times.
Danny - fair enough! I didn't want "disrupting" to mean "intentionally disrupting", but that Hx option is definitelly the most flailing sentence of the group.
"One of them has skills, resources or people that would be managed far more profitably if you were in charge of them. Tell that player Hx+3."
Better?
-
Daumantas,
Yes, I see what you mean! It's worth thinking about, and a good point.
My hunch is still that people will get confused about how to actually use this move in the game, though. Only time will tell, however!
(Also: I posted about this playbook on Google+, you may get some more traffic soon...)
-
Haven't played AW at all yet, but this playbook looks really cool. Badger is probably my favorite Firefly "NPC", so having the opportunity to seem someone like him as a main character in something is exciting. I'm going to keep this in my back pocket for my group's second run at AW (going straight vanilla at first). Thanks for sharing this!
-
I ported this into a pdf and this is what I have so far
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9cu0IVYfHtiRDlKdXhsV3h3YTg/edit
As you can see, it does need a lot more work.
I agree with earlier sentiments that you need an actual move here that brings in barter. You can't just assume from a design standpoint that an MC will be able to cover it or fill in the gaps that you leave here. As it is, the Maestro'd playbook doesn't have a barter-producing move and it's assumed their business is always breaking even.
Also, there definitely isn't enough sour here. Between starting moves and improvements a player will pretty much pick up all of the Abacus moves available. It could probably could use one more.
I would suggest killing two birds with one stone. Create a barter-producing move that the Abacus comes equipped with. Then they choose one extra move from the ones already available.
Fleshing out the Network with some cool options, tags, and weaknesses couldn't hurt either.
-
Where is the big difference between this guy and am Operator with
Brokering Deals, Surveilance, Infiltration and Deliveries as Gigs?
A Crew is not so different from your network idea.
-
Praion: The difference is between Badger and Malcom Reynolds.
You play the tentative status quo in a world without any, not a guy who flits from job to job just to keep afloat.
I'm not sure if that's enough for you, but it is for me.
Anyhoo. Due to some money woes and having to finish my master's, I probably won't be updating this anytime soon. My apologies if there are people waiting for such updates!
If anyone wants to use this playbook but feels like there are gaps that are missing (like a barter move or such), feel free to add them on if you want.
I'd do it myself, but I feel like there are some things fiction-side that I'd need to nail down better before I add extra moves (and change existing ones).
-
Per DWierd's instructions and nerdwerd's suggestion, here's what I might do to the Abacus.
A starting Abacus gets Businessman and 1 other move.
Businessman: as per Moonlighting (with 2-juggling and gigs as defined by your Network) but every time you roll, pay Upkeep. If you don't, pick one vulnerability which is most pressing (rather than just extant). If you miss two payments in a row, well, I guess they're all "most pressing."
note: Some of the vulnerabilities take a little mental massaging to fit in the context of a Network (rather than a gang, hardhold, or followers), but only a little. As usual you have a vulnerability go off twice, it's extra fucking true (also, if your people are idle or deserting, who's working your gigs, your own sweet self?).
Network
By default, your network is a loose-knit group of castaways and cutouts. Upkeep 1-barter, +desertion.
Choose 2 for your bread-and-butter and day-to-day.
You've got a rare contact (Milk) for something luxe or rare, like weapons, drugs, or transportation. +Making Deliveries (1-barter/bushwhacked).
You've got two no-nonsense enforcers (Vega and Ezekiel). +Enforcement (1-barter/overthrown).
You've got an understanding with the local warlord (Jonathan) that you're the gatekeeper of something necessary, like food, medicine, or gear. +Honest Work (1-barter/impoverished).
You've got a front or a patsy (Quentin). +Making Deals (1-barter/shut out).
You've got cachet and an envoy (Trigger) with the distant looming threat (Greer's gang). +Raiding (1-barter/embattled).
Your network is loyal (or maybe they just have nowhere else to go). If aren't paying them, though, they still need to eat. -Desertion, +Idle.
Your people are the best, and they know it, the bastards. Take +1 ongoing to Businessman, Upkeep +1-barter.
Your people are the dregs and the desperate, but you only have to pay for what you get. Take -1 ongoing to Businessman, Upkeep -1-barter.
Choose 1 for your big earners (who else wants in?):
A real whiz, maybe a mechanic (Grass) or a sawbones (Key). +Technical work (2-barter/Shut Out).
A pimp or madame (Dust) and their primo tail (Grace, June, Frost). +Fucking (2-barter/entangled).
A no-nonsense tracker (Jaim) and their sharp-eyed, long-rifled gang. +Compound defense (2-barter/inflitrated).
Some slick hired killers (Cloud and Feather). +Doing Murders (3-barter/embattled), +Reprisals.
Choose 1 for your problems (or Choose 2 and +1 juggling if your ambition exceeds your resources):
You owe a shark (Mercer – for startup costs, recent expansion, expensive tastes?) and they aren't patient about it. +Paying debts (you keep up with them/they come due).
You didn't get where you are without seriously pissing off someone connected (or pissing off someone seriously connected – either way, it's Chack). +Avoiding someone (you keep well clear/they catch you in a bad spot).
You rely heavily on following or appearing to follow a code when you do business (what is it?). +Maintaining your honor (you keep your word and your name/you cross a line).
Choose 1 for your people's totally manageable shortcomings:
They're always ready to ditch for greener pastures. +desertion
They regard you as the lynchpin. +judgement
They have other shit that takes precedence if you aren't paying. +idle
They're assholes. +reprisals
They have seriously split loyalties (or at least someone thinks they should). +obligation.
-
See, for me I wouldn't choose to have the Abacus given gigs because I feel that then he invades the operators niche too much but I do feel that a strong option to personalise the the network is a good idea.
Perhaps what I would do is something akin to how the hardholder chooses options for their hold; they have a list of options, with limited picks, that contains both useful resources and potential treasures.
Anyway, hopefully this is a tad more permanent than the operator in spirit but more focused on gigs and people than say the hardholder whilst actually earning barter unlike the Maestro'd.
(Many thanks to Hobbesque, i cribbed a fair bit.)
Example
The Abacus takes Businessman and one other Abacus move;
Businessman -
As long as you can pay the upkeep, you get the services of your network for the session. If your balance is positive then you get that much Barter at the start of the session. If a component of your network becomes contested then remove its balance till it is no longer contested.
By default, your network is few goons willing to do your bidding, who know the area well and the people in it. Balance -1 barter
Pick 4 [this number can change] options from the list below:
- You've got an understanding with the local warlord (Jonathan) that you're the gatekeeper of something necessary, like food, medicine, services or gear and he'll allow you leeway when it comes to dealing with 'problems' as long as he gets his cut. Balance -1.
- You've got three no-nonsense enforcers (Vega, Anders and Ezekiel) who know how to rough someone up and get them to play how you want. Balance - 1.
- You've got a F***ing psycho (Soap) on hand who is good at taking people out and getting away with it too, but his services don't come cheap. Balance -1.
- You've got a front or a patsy (Quentin) who is your public face, if there's attempt on you, as if they would dare, or your rep goes down the toilet; he'll take the bullet for you but he demands the highlife till that day comes. Balance -1.
- You make sure to keep a looming threat sweet so that they won't come after you and steer clear of messing with your ventures. Balance -1.
- Your network has transportation options; Vehicle/s and associated drivers, enough to carry your goons + more. Balance -1.
- You've got a rare contact (Milk) for something luxe or rare, like weapons, drugs, or transportation but they expect your protection, direct or indirect [by which I mean if you can leverage someone else into doing it then thats good too], when they need it. Balance +1
- You've got most of the local merchants or premises paying you 'protection' but if one of them steps outta line you gotta hammer them down before the others get ideas. Balance +1
- You've got a real whiz, maybe a mechanic (Grass) or a sawbones (Key) in your pocket who passes you a share of the profits as long as you help them out with their little indiscretion (it's not so little) and make sure it stays your little secret. Balance +1.
- You're the backer of a pimp or madame (Dust) and their primo tail (Grace, June, Frost), set of dealers (Badger, Jez, Combo) or some other quasi-legal venture who give you a slice of the action but keep attracting the attention of the big fish around. Balance +1.
End Example
I did think about giving purely sour options like obligations and that but I feel that the paying options give enough of that on their own to justify their own cost and the options you pay for have enough incentive with having to find a way to pay for them.
-
I would change the name to "Legitimate Businessman"
-
I would change the name to "Legitimate Businessman"
This makes me feel like some move needs to be Root in the Community. ;)
-
Some more thoughts:
I had been thinking about this playbook yesterday and how I would change their core mechanic to avoid having a roll. Good job!
Pick 4 [this number can change] options from the list below:
I would say you want to have more options that give barter than they are allowed to choose. Otherwise, what's stopping a player from taking their maxed out Gunlugger or Chopper and then switching to an Abacus and scooping up all the positives?
Also, I'm playing a hardholder right now and I managed to have 12 barter in three sessions. With +3 Hard and +2 Sharp I don't fail a lot of rolls and the MC hasn't been able to force my hand a lot. I'm down to 4 barter now but the only reason I'm down is because I've been spending it like crazy, every time I throw a party for my hold I spend 3 barter which means the population fucking loves me, and I just got an improvement last session which raised my 10+ result on Wealth to +4 barter.
Point is: Barter is not hard to come by for the right playbook, or the right combination of decent stat+moves.
You've got four options that give barter so I would think you should be able to pick 2 or 3 starting out. But I think there need to be more things that give +2 barter and the good things in the network need to cost more. In general.
You want good shit? Then you should be forced to pay! Soap (an awesome name for an assassin) needs to cost -2 or -3 barter, for instance. Because he's good. Like, really good!
You willing to take obligations? Then you should get paid for helping out. The warlord whom you have an understanding with, that should be +1 barter, but then you have to help out the warlord, who should also be the most unsavory kind of motherfucker. Think: Toecutter from Mad Max.
-
I'm glad you like the idea. :)
I agree, less options but some options with higher/lower balances is probably a good idea, I was thinking about it later and what occurred to me was that there was all these nice crew options that people wouldn't be able to take unless they wanted to be heavily out of balance (just to have +1 sum balance you would have to take 3 barter paying ones and then you would only get one crew option of five )
So maybe add on like another wealth one, say obligation like you suggested, and have 3 +1's, 2 +2's
Whilst its something to be aware of, I'm not certain that a playbook should be designed with end-level characters jumping into it from others in mind but rather give a good progression for the playbook they are in till it reaches the end.
I have no problem with Obligations as an option, I was, rather ambiguously, referring to obligation gigs and options which were purely detrimental
So how about this as the new example:
Businessman -
As long as you can pay the upkeep, you get the services of your network for the session. If your balance is positive then you get that much Barter at the start of the session. If a component of your network becomes contested then remove its balance till it is no longer contested.
By default, your network is few goons willing to do your bidding, who know the area well and the people in it. Balance -1 barter
Pick 4 [this number can change] options from the list below:
[ / don't indicate fractions but 2 possible values for that option]
- You've got an understanding with the local warlord (Jonathan) that you're the gatekeeper of something necessary, like food, medicine, services or gear and he'll allow you leeway when it comes to dealing with 'problems' as long as he gets his cut. Balance -1.
- You've got three no-nonsense enforcers (Vega, Anders and Ezekiel) who know how to rough someone up and get them to play how you want. Balance - 1/2.
- You've got a F***ing psycho (Soap) on hand who is good at taking people out and getting away with it too, but his services don't come cheap. Balance -2/3.
- You've got a front or a patsy (Quentin) who is your public face, if there's attempt on you, as if they would dare, or your rep goes down the toilet; he'll take the bullet for you but he demands the highlife till that day comes. Balance -1.
- You make sure to keep a looming threat sweet so that they won't come after you and steer clear of messing with your ventures. Balance -1.
- Your network has transportation options; Vehicle/s and associated drivers, enough to carry your goons + more. Balance -1.
- You've got a rare contact (Milk) for something luxe or rare, like weapons, drugs, or transportation but they expect your protection, direct or indirect [by which I mean if you can leverage someone else into doing it then thats good too], when they need it. Balance +1
- You've got most of the local merchants or premises paying you 'protection' but if one of them steps outta line you gotta hammer them down before the others get ideas. Balance +2 [bumped this up because of the likely strong pc blowback]
- You've got a real whiz, maybe a mechanic (Grass) or a sawbones (Key) in your pocket who passes you a share of the profits as long as you help them out with their little indiscretion (it's not so little) and make sure it stays your little secret. Balance +1.
- You're the backer of a pimp or madame (Dust) and their primo tail (Grace, June, Frost), set of dealers (Badger, Jez, Combo) or some other quasi-legal venture who give you a slice of the action but keep attracting the attention of the big fish around. Balance +2/3.
- You owe the local warlord (Dog head) your obligation, he pays you for your services, but he expects them how and when he needs them. Balance +1.
End Example
-
You're right. You shouldn't design from a "is this playbook going to picked second" viewpoint. I just immediately saw the +1 options and thought it was a little unbalanced.
I think you could get rid of the plurality of numbers. If you want to remove the roll you'd have to give a concrete number that the player (and the MC) knows the option is worth.
What if each +barter option gave an obligation that needed to be performed every session and every -barter option gave an accompanying thing that could be accomplished every session? Like, if you have Soap in your network he could whack one NPC but if you have Dust in your network than you have to keep them from getting killed by a rival or imprisoned by whatever passes as the local law.
-
I only gave a plurality because I didn't know what number to put, in any finalised case I imagine it would be a set number.
I would rather not give a mechanical thing to each of the options; the strength of the network is in the thematic, you have npcs you control to do your bidding who can bring some nice skills if they are upgrade ones and I think that is balanced by the fictional requirements that the paying options have which I hope I implied strongly enough in their descriptions
Secondly because then they would just be either rote and quickly become annoying if every session or would have to then incorporate a random element. I would rather provide a rich ground for the MC to pull problems from as merited rather than obligate the player or the MC to do it unnaturally.
-
Secondly because then they would just be either rote and quickly become annoying if every session or would have to then incorporate a random element. I would rather provide a rich ground for the MC to pull problems from as merited rather than obligate the player or the MC to do it unnaturally.
Good point.
But maybe this idea could then be: Each option provide a threat impulse for the MC to work off of.
For example, Soap could have potentially killed somebody which will bring heat to the Abacus'es network OR Dust's supply is always in danger of running low so he might try to cut a deal with one of your rivals or undercut your own stock.
The idea being that the options of your organization not only reflect the character of your organization and what is being accomplished through the network, but the MC is given their own list of options to poke and prod at the character with.
-
I like the fictional descriptions you've added to all of your Network options, Hidersine. That's one of the things that I liked about Dweird's original writeup: all of it provides fictional hooks, both in terms of leverage and trouble.
However, I don't think we should discard the dice mechanic just because other playbooks use it. Followers and Wealth are pretty similar, but they have very different feels because the Hocus is different from the Hardholder and they could both totally be in the same game without it being a problem.
The other reason the "payoff/payoff and some trouble/all the trouble" moves are great is because of that line at the end of how you have the Network written: If a component of your network becomes contested... Contested says who? The MC is supposed to throw fuckery your way, but as both MC and player I like the dice to come in to help disclaim decision making.
For example: The first session opens with Key showing up at your door, needing you to cover up her indiscretions with a dead boy or a live mutant. Oh, and it's also Jonathan's favorite boy/mutant, and your position with him is now in jeopardy. That sounds like a great scene! But as the MC, I'd be reluctant to drop that much hammer and as a player, I might feel put upon if that much hammer was dropped on me – unless a miss was rolled on Businessman, fair and square.
That being said, I think I'd put in on all of the gig-options from my list stuff like "as long as you hide their little indiscretions (not so little), +Technical work" and so on. And then have Businessman have something like "instead of or in addition to catastrophe on a gig, the MC may have one of your contacts come to you with (as) a problem." I'd probably also change the Upkeep-to-trouble mechanic to be "For every Barter less than your upkeep you pay, gain 1-Arrears. Every session, the MC gets hold equal to your Arrears that they may spend, 1 for 1, to either make a vulnerability pressing or have one of your contacts come to you with (as) a problem. You can buy off Arrears with an equal amount of Barter."
-
However, I don't think we should discard the dice mechanic just because other playbooks use it.
I really like the idea of having a playbook that feels totally unique yet fits in with the fiction perfectly. Dice are going to come out regardless, so I see no reason to force that onto it. However, you gave the perfect solution to keeping a diceless mechanic...
I'd probably also change the Upkeep-to-trouble mechanic to be "For every Barter less than your upkeep you pay, gain 1-Arrears. Every session, the MC gets hold equal to your Arrears that they may spend, 1 for 1, to either make a vulnerability pressing or have one of your contacts come to you with (as) a problem. You can buy off Arrears with an equal amount of Barter."
That's perfect. Every option could have an Arrears (or a tag) along with the Barter they bring in, and instead of having negative Barter costs for option the move could just state that MC could gets 2 Hold at the start of every session to activate Arrears (or tags). If the MC doesn't use the hold it doesn't add up but goes away by the end of session.
So with gigs and Moonlighting the consequences are sometimes a job goes bad.
With a hold and Wealth the consequences are sometimes money isn't rolling in and the population is suffering.
With a network and Businessman the consequences are you're always getting paid but you have to constantly keep on top of things to keep that money flowing.
I think that works thematically a lot better than the usual roll+stat mechanic.
-
I like the Arrears mechanic alot, its a good way of bring in the problems fairly (which you were correct in saying was a problem) as it would be probably mostly voluntary; you would have to choose not to pay your bills or to take more crew options than your network supported.
-
I still think dice need to come in or else you can create overly deterministic and/or steady states.
Maybe a mechanic like the Hoarder (or, elsewhere on this board, the Turncoat)? Your Network has attributes, one of which is Arrears (arrears doesn't actually make the most sense in this context, but whatever). Bad Stuff goes up when you use your Network's assets. At the beginning of session, GM rolls +Arrears, gains hold to mess with you.
(Do you guys know what I'm talking about? Troubles of LE playbooks...).
-
I still think dice need to come in or else you can create overly deterministic and/or steady states.
Deterministic does not equate to consistency.
Check out Undying, a diceless AW hack for Vampire role-playing: http://enigmamachinations.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/undying-beta-v3-0-play-sheets1.pdf
-
I've been giving this playbook some more thought.
Instead of choosing a number of options for your Network and having to maintain some kind of balance of barter coming in and out, what if you got the ENTIRE Network but you just always start every session with a flat 2-barter?
Doesn't matter how much you made last session or or how much you spent down to, you start with 2-barter.
I think this would be big enough to make the playbook stand out from the Operator as it throws a TON of named NPCs at the MC to use, and it's also pretty powerful for the Abacus. Maybe lower their starting moves to the Network and +1 move.
I realize this might make the Network seem like just another gang, but not really, because you can't utilize them as a gang. They're disparate personalities that you know from all over the place but who are never all in the same place at the same time and definitely not fighting for you. The choices you would make during character creation would become purely narrative as well.
I think this would change our interaction with the Network as well. Maybe you'd have a start of session move which would give you access to your Network. A 10+ means you'd have most of our Network to call upon, and a missed roll means you only have 1 or 2 members of your Network in contact with you.
-
What if you get Hold that you can spend to call on your Network?
-
A theme I kept in my head but didn't really put into writing is the possibility of an Abacus profiting from other people's crises (by virtue of being prepared and having a network to call on). So he makes money when people lose things, get injured or go hungry.
That was a bit difficult to turn into a mechanic in terms of which crises count? And why should other people care?
I like the two-barter flat idea, but having things like that stop other people from attacking the Abacus through his money, which would be fun times if it happened.
It should ideally be fun to hate the Abacus.
-
Would it work if the "person in crisis" was the one who activated the mechanic?
(Like: spend 1-barter to have the Abacus's gang come to your rescue. That's not great, but just for illustration. It makes the transaction a little more abstract. Better would be if you could collect "debt" with the Abacus, like Monsterhearts Strings, and pay for such interventions by accruing debt.)
-
If you could tie it in to when other playbooks end up with Wants (or whatever). Perverse incentives for the Abacus to interfere with other player's beginning-of-session moves (that would make me hate the Abacus, but also make them maybe too useful to just kill on sight).
Maybe "Other players may call for your help with a Want; you get to pick one (They owe you money, you assume some of their powerbase, etc)."
-
Hm. How about this?
I.O.Who? - when you use your network to help someone in need, get 1-debt over them. Debt counts as barter for anyone who wants to buy it. Otherwise, exchange debt 1-for-1 into hold as per the 'In your pocket move.' Works on NPCs only (does work on NPCs that are part of a PC's group for PC debt purposes).
Really, really crappy wording, but you get the idea. Abacus collects debts, pawns them off to other people or makes use of the person he 'helped' temporarily. Doesn't work on PCs, but if they have a bunch of people under them, it works on those.
I like the implied dynamic even if I don't quite like the move itself. Maybe someone has a better idea for a different move, or a different dynamic altogether?
-
I like that pretty well. You help people (doesn't say whether they asked for or wanted it!) and get to take their stuff. Maybe take out the "if they want it" clause, at the very least in reference to the person you helped - that way, you can always spemd it to get a 10+ on manipulate, thus giving alternate over-PC leverage.
There were some cool debt moves someone made, including a custom operator move that could just be an Abacus move instead. I'll link to them here when I have time later if no-one beats me to it.
-
That'd be great! I'm all for stealing custom moves and making playbook moves out of them.
-
Here it is! (http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=2647.0)
When you offer promises instead of payment, roll +hot: On a 10+, they're down with it, you gain 1-debt for each point of barter you're short, and you're on your merry way. On a 7-9, same thing, only they want something more: a favor, a little something something, or a bigger debt than the value you're receiving. On a miss, no dice, and you've pissed them off.
When somebody owes you, you are always considered to have leverage when you manipulate them, and you may choose to roll +debt against them instead of +hot.
When you're in debt, at the start of each session roll +debt (if you owe more than one person then just roll the highest, you deadbeat). On a 10+, they're looking for the full value, right now, and they'll do whatever they can to extract it from you. On a 7-9, they're willing to let it slide for a bit longer, but they're going to want something for their trouble: a favor, a little something something, or maybe a down payment. On a miss, they've got other things on their mind, but they'll get around to you eventually.
You know I'm good for it: (Operator playbook move) whenever you offer promises instead of payment, you always succeed as though you had rolled a 10+. If you attempt to use this move on somebody you already owe a debt, you are acting under fire.
-
Hmm. Cool, but not immediatelly stealable, I think.
How about this? Still needs work I feel, but I like the crux of it.
Market forces - at the beggining of every session, name someone who doesn't owe you yet, but should, and roll +cool. On a 10+, all three. On a 7-9, pick two.
* They're in serious sudden scarcity or danger and need something only your network can provide.
* A key member of your network does not demand immediate pay or special treatment.
* Someone pays a debt they owe you without hassle or force.
-
Liiive, damn you, liiiive!
I came back to my notes recently and have largely finished a version that I like (full credit to everyone else for most of the work; my major contribution is a take on network similar to the hoard, since that's what I decided I liked best). I'll post it in a day or two once I get done fiddling.
DWeird: I like Market Forces a lot, but I'm not 100% on the third option (“someone pays a debt...”) because it seems unconnected to the lead in (“name someone who doesn’t owe you, but should...”). It should either be replaced with something better or nuked, and then on a hit, the first one is true (someone needs your help) and on a strong hit no-one demands anything.
Unless it’s supposed to represent your general douchebaggery (market forces are always in play; you get to choose whether you're paying your people for marginal benefits provided, getting jingle back without fuss, or putting someone in a useful spot) and you name someone up front just so there’s a referent if you pick the last option? I actually like that quite a bit, so maybe that's the crux you were fond of.
The other question is what do you do if no-one owes you (probably, let us be honest, because it's only the first session) or if a PC is the one who owes you, or whatever, but that probably doesn't have to be in the move, it can be in the "notes" section. Vincent allowed himself some off-charsheet explanatory wordcount, so we can too.
-
Here's that thing that I said I'd post.
Name
Joe, Gray, Moss, Pierce, Case, Jules, Mirth, Rain.
Adams, Bach, Carter, Evans, Young, Thomas, White, Price.
QED, Once, Boss's Man, Mirror, Thirteen, Pi, Carver, Master.
Stats
Cool+2 Hard-1 Hot-2 Sharp+2 Weird+1
Cool+2 Hard0 Hot-1 Sharp+1 Weird+1
Cool+2 Hard+1 Hot0 Sharp+1 Weird-1
Cool+2 Hard+1 Hot+1 Sharp-1 Weird0
Moves
You get all the basic moves. Choose 2 Abacus moves.
Hx
On your turn (choose however many you want):
One of them you owe for services rendered. Tell that player Hx+2.
One of them has skills, access or resources that are essential to your enterprise, and knows it. Tell that player Hx+2.
One of them helped you out of a tight spot and didn’t ask anything for it, and you have no idea why. Tell them Hx-2.
Tell everyone else Hx-1. You don't advertise - unless you do, in which case tell everyone Hx+1.
On the others' turns, pick one or both:
One of them has skills, resources or people that would be managed far more profitably if you were in charge of them. Whatever number that players tells you, ignore it and write down Hx+3 next to their character name instead.
One of them owes you, because you said so. Whatever number that players tells you, ignore it and write down Hx+3 next to their character name instead.
Everyone else, whatever number they tell you, add +1 to it and write it next to their character's name. You stay informed.
Look
Man, Woman, or concealed.
Formal wear, vintage wear, casual wear, signature wear, or luxe wear.
Concealed face, sharp face, stern face, fat face or forgettable face.
Deep eyes, dead eyes, calculating eyes, wise eyes, weary eyes.
Tall body, wiry body, pudgy body, crippled body, hard body.
Gear
In addition to your network, you get:
* 1 failsafe weapon.
* Oddments worth 5-barter.
* Fashion suitable to your look, including at your option a piece worth 1-armor (you detail).
Failsafe weapons:
* .38 revolver (2-harm close reload loud)
* 9mm (2-harm close loud)
* antique handgun (2-harm close reload loud valuable)
* sawed-off shotgun (3-harm close reload messy)
* machete (3-harm hand messy)
Abacus moves
In the pocket: at the beginning of a session, roll +cool. On a 10+, hold 2. On a 7-9, hold 1. Spend your hold 1 for 1 to have someone in your network act on prior orders or established duties and make a move on your behalf as if you were there to do it yourself.
Swimming with sharks: as long as you remain on good terms with whoever is in charge, you can roll +sharp instead of +hard to go aggro, using members of their gang as a weapon.
Options: you can spread 1 barter around once per session, getting 1 extra hold any time you get hold for the rest of the session and your connections, wealth, or influence could conceivably help you out. It’s not magic, it’s power and commerce.
Keeping tabs: you can read a sitch regarding anything you spent barter on, even if you're not there.
Served cold: when using time and manpower to fuck with someone, roll +cool. On a hit, hold 3. On a 7-9, hold 1. Spend hold 1 for 1 throughout your fuckery to:
Find the least loyal member of their group.
Trap them, imprison them, or remove an escape route.
Put something left unprotected in danger.
Hide something important or dangerous in plain view.
I.O.Who?: When you use your network to help someone in need, get 1-debt over them. For you, debt counts as barter for anyone who wants to buy it. Additionally, you may exchange debt 1-for-1 into hold on the debtor as per the in your pocket move.
Market forces: At the beginning of every session, name someone who doesn't owe you yet, but should, and roll +cool. On a 10+, all three. On a 7-9, pick two.
They're in serious sudden scarcity or danger and need something only your network can provide.
A key member of your network does not demand immediate pay or special treatment.
Someone pays a debt they owe you without hassle or force.
You know I'm good for it: whenever you offer promises instead of payment, you always succeed as though you had rolled a 10+. If you attempt to use this move on somebody you already owe a debt, you are acting under fire.
Special
When you have sex with someone, either you get 1 hold on them or they get 1 hold on your network as per In the pocket, their choice.
Advancement
+1cool (max cool+3)
+1 hard (max hard+2)
+1 sharp (max sharp+2)
Get a new Abacus move
Get a new Abacus move
Advance your network
Advance your network
Get 2 gigs (detail) and Moonlighting or a holding (detail) and Wealth
Get a move from another playbook
Get a move from another playbook
+1 to any stat (max +3)
Retire your character (to safety or as a threat)
Create a second character to play
Change your character to a new type
Choose 3 basic moves and advance them.
Advance the other 4 basic moves.
Additional Rules
Debt Peripheral Move
When you offer promises instead of payment, roll +hot: On a 10+, they're down with it, you gain 1-debt for each point of barter you're short, and you're on your merry way. On a 7-9, same thing, only they want something more: a favor, a little something something, or a bigger debt than the value you're receiving. On a miss, no dice, and you've pissed them off.
When somebody owes you, you are always considered to have leverage when you Manipulate them, and you may choose to roll +debt against them instead of +hot.
When you're in debt, at the start of each session roll +debt (if you owe more than one person then just roll the highest, you deadbeat). On a 10+, they're looking for the full value, right now, and they'll do whatever they can to extract it from you. On a 7-9, they're willing to let it slide for a bit longer, but they're going to want something for their trouble: a favor, a little something something, or maybe a down payment. On a miss, they've got other things on their mind, but they'll get around to you eventually. If it’s a PC holding debt on a PC, hits function as per a Manipulate roll to perform a task of the creditor’s choice (which could be paying off the debt, or something else). They can choose to bring this result to bear at any point in the session.
Network
By default, your network is a loose-knit group of castaways and cutouts. Upkeep is 1-barter, vulnerabilities are +desertion.
Choose your assets. If your upkeep goes below 0, it’s a surplus. May your jingle keep you warm.
What kind of business do you run? Choose 1, 2 or 3 (or 4 and +1 upkeep) for your bread-and-butter and day-to-day.
weapons drugs transportation muscle food medicine gear a front/patsy cachet with looming threat a PC (who? what do they do for you?)
Choose 1 (or 2 and add +1 upkeep) for your big earners:
protection money whiz mechanic sawbones pimp/madame dealer tracker and his tribe hitman a PC (who? what do they do for you?)
How good is your help? Pick 1 or 2.
Your network is loyal (or maybe they just have nowhere else to go). If you aren't paying them, though, they still need to eat. -Desertion, +Idle.
Your people are the best, and they know it, the bastards. Take +1 ongoing to moves utilizing your network (but not calling on your contacts or +arrears), Upkeep +1-barter.
Your people are the dregs and the desperate, but you only have to pay for what you get. Take -1 ongoing to moves utilizing your network (but not calling on your contacts or +arrears), Upkeep -1-barter.
Choose 1 for your problems (or 2, and -1 upkeep):
You owe a shark (Mercer – for startup costs, recent expansion, expensive tastes?) and they aren't patient about it.
You didn't get where you are without seriously pissing off someone connected or pissing off someone seriously connected (Chack). What the hell did you do?
You rely heavily on following (or appearing to follow) a code to do business (what is it?). Sometimes you even have to live up to it.
Choose 1 for your people's totally manageable shortcomings (or 2, and -1 upkeep):
They're always ready to ditch for greener pastures. +desertion
They regard you as the lynchpin. +judgement
They have other shit that take precedence if you aren't paying. +idle
They're assholes. +reprisals
They have seriously split loyalties (or at least someone thinks they should). +obligation.
Your Network begins play with arrears=0. At the beginning of each session, pay its upkeep; for each Barter you are short, your network gets +1 arrears.
As long as your network’s arrears is 3 or less, you can call on your contacts for favors. Describe your situation and how your network might help and roll +cool. The MC’s job is to come up with something for you that they genuinely think you’ll find useful in the situation you’ve described, and to have your network make it happen (you might remind the MC who works for you). Your business partners will show up to do their thing in their own inimitable style. On a 10+, your network’s arrears holds where it is. On a 7-9, your network gets +1 arrears. On a miss, your network goes immediately to arrears+4.
When you ask for help, your people will expect to be paid back at some point, in barter or favors.
As long as your network’s arrears is 3 or less, you can leverage your network for jingle. Trade IOUs and favors to get oddments worth 1-barter out of it and give it +1 arrears. If 1-barter doesn’t seem like that much, maybe call on one of your big earners, instead.
At the beginning of the session, roll+your network’s arrears. On a 10+, the MC holds 3; on a 7-9, the MC holds 1.
During the session, the MC can spend her hold 1 for 1 to:
name a vulnerability. It becomes an acute problem rather than a chronic one.
name an asset. Any issues with that asset become immediate problems (they show up with a dead boy or a live mutant, someone tries to headhunt them), or some part of your business related to them otherwise goes askew.
name one of your problems. It becomes pressing rather than merely present.
name a part of your network you asked for a favor. The marker gets called in. If you don’t make good, act under fire.
have your network come up suddenly short of operating expenses, to the tune of 2-barter. If you don’t pay it, act under fire.
when resolve the matter at hand (for better or worse) or pay off a debt or favor, give your network -1 arrears.
If the MC has any hold left at the end of the session, give your network +1 arrears, to a maximum of arrears+4.
If your network has arrears+4, take -1 ongoing to any rolls you make that utilize your network (not including rolling +arrears ) and you must act under fire to call on your contacts.
When you advance your network, choose from the following options (up to each one once):
Resolve a problem or erase a vulnerability
Change how good your help is
-1 upkeep
Select one or two more options from any category (or replace them with ones from the same category)
Notes:
When you use In the pocket with a PC (either because they’re part of your network or because of the Special move) you use the Abacus's stats, even if theirs are better. Ever had a job where you followed orders even where the task was pointless or counterproductive, using not your own best judgement, but your boss's? This is that. If a PC doesn’t do the thing, whatever it is, they have to Act Under Fire (as per a successful Manipulate roll).
With Options, you definitely get the extra hold with Abacus moves (In the pocket, Served cold) and read a person if they’re not a total rando who you could never have conceivably heard of or vice versa. Possibly other moves as well at the MC’s option (see what I did there?). There’s plenty of stuff it probably shouldn’t help you with, e.g., Deep brain scan, Bonefeel, and other weird shit.
Some of the vulnerabilities take a little mental massaging to fit in the context of a Network (rather than a gang, hardhold, or followers), but only a little. When the MC uses hold to activate them, it’s like if a holding (or whatever) was in Want. If your network has a vulnerability twice (like you started with +desertion, and then also chose it as your problem), the MC can spend hold to have it go off normally, or two hold to make it extra fucking true.
You vulnerabilities may affect the availability of your Network. If your people are idle or deserting, who's working your jobs and solving your problems, your own sweet self?
The quality of your network and being at arrears+4 can affect rolls that utilize your network. This doesn't include the +arrears roll or calling on your contacts for favors; it absolutely includes In the pocket (both rolling for Hold at the beginning of the session and any rolls made through your network), Served cold, and Market forces. It may affect Swimming with sharks, read a sitch rolls made with Keeping tabs, and other rolls made in the context of your network (like Manipulate), MC’s call.
If a PC is a part of your network and you end up using them when you call on your contacts for favors, you get the results of a 10+ Manipulate roll on them to do what you want. Afterwards, the MC can spend hold from a +arrears roll, 1 for 1, to give them debt over you.
-
THE FIXER is a mashup of the above ideas from hobbesque and Hidersine. Legal-sized trifold playbook (http://asifproductions.com/sites/default/files/fixer.pdf).