Barf Forth Apocalyptica
barf forth apocalyptica => Apocalypse World => Topic started by: Ereshkigal on October 14, 2013, 10:58:18 PM
-
Tonight i had a situation where i wanted an npc knock out the gunlugger hitting him in the head from behind with a bottle.
The gunlugger was humiliating the chopper in a fist fight and one loyal member of his gang decided to knock him over because he was tired of the continuous threats made by the gunlugger to the gang and his leader (my move was to deal harm), so he attacked from behind while the gunlugger was holding the chopper threatening to break his fingers.
The gunlugger demanded a +sharp roll to see if he was surprised by this gang member (like reading a sitch with the only purpose to know the true position of the enemy). He rolled 12, so he saw the attacker before being knocked out.
This outcome really bothers me for 2 reasons:
1) Whenever i decide to use moves like "capture someone" or "divide them", they can call for a "reading a situation" to avoid bad things.
2) It makes "sharp" people almost impossible to surprise, because even with 7 they can ask the right question: "what's the true position of my enemies?". I don't think reading a sitch was designed with that purpose in mind.
So my questions are:
Should a player be entitled to roll to reading a sitch when surprised retroactively? Or should they read a charged situation before if they think they could be ambushed, and if they don't, well... they didn't think the situation was charged and so they are ambushed and they have to suck it up?
p.s.: stupid side question, in my AW the players are gaining almost an advancement per session, is that normal? I feel like it's too high, what do you think?
-
Why would he think he's entitled to a read a sitch roll. Was he reading a sitch? He has no special entitlement.
Was your NPC move in keeping with your agenda and principals? If so, then the damage is dealt. But I gotta ask, you say you "wanted an npc to know out the gunlugger." Why did you want that?
-
Reading a Situation is something you do, when it's your turn to talk in the general conversation. When the MC describes something and then asks 'what do you do?' you can talk about how you're reading the situation, keeping your eyes out, etc. Or you can describe how you're beating the crap out of some NPC because he pissed you off. But once you describe whatever it is, the MC is going to say something, and you don't get to interrupt them to change what it was you were doing, because you don't like what they said.
Reading a Situation is not a perception check, it is not automatic or passive; to do it, you have to do it.
It sounds to me like the PC was beating up the Chopper, not reading the situation. As the MC it's important that your moves make sense, and come out of the fiction; if this is the first we've even heard of this loyal NPC in this scene, having him knock out the Gunlugger out of nowhere might be too hard a move, it's hard to say. If on the other hand we know this NPC is there, and we know this NPC is loyal/easily-pissed-off/whatever, or you've already described how he's picked up a bottle with violence in his eyes, then it seems pretty straightforward to have him smash the Gunlugger in the head.
Assuming the Chopper is another PC, I think it is probably equally great to just tell the Gunlugger what's happening and see what he does about it -- if he decides to react to the NPC with violence, that's going to make the Chopper react, etc. etc.
But really, it depends on what you think makes sense as the MC -- if this guy knocking out the Gunlugger with a bottle makes sense as your move, then that's what you say. Just remember that after that, you still ask the player: what do you do?
-
Well the entire situation was:
The gunlugger (a PC) challenged the chopper (a PC) in a fist fight because they were arguing (and it wasn't the first time). The fist fight was encouraged by the chopper gang and happened in a circled space made up by the chopper gang members (a la Fight Club), inside their night club (because the chopper selected rich and grounded for his gang).
This NPC was always very supportive of the chopper, he treated him with flattery all the time and everybody knew that he hated the gunlugger. And he also was with the chopper the first time the gunlugger broke the jaw of his leader with a punch out of nowhere, weeks before.
Every time the gunlugger spoke in the presence of this NPC, he always wanted to point out that the chopper was better, stronger, nicer, smarter... than the gunlugger. Because of these reasons the chopper made this npc his deputy.
So all the players except the gunlugger weren't really surprised that this npc tried to save the honour of his leader, bludgeoning the gunlugger in the head when he was weakest. He acted also because the gunlugger said he was going to kill the chopper if he didn't humiliated himself in front of his gang, and the chopper said that he preferred to be killed and he would have continued to fight to the death.
When the gunlugger was K.O. i asked the chopper what he wanted to do, and he made an example of his deputy and almost killed him.
That's the situation in short.
-
Sounds cool to me.
-
Sounds like it followed the fiction nicely.
Reading a Situation is something you do, when it's your turn to talk in the general conversation. When the MC describes something and then asks 'what do you do?' you can talk about how you're reading the situation, keeping your eyes out, etc. Or you can describe how you're beating the crap out of some NPC because he pissed you off. But once you describe whatever it is, the MC is going to say something, and you don't get to interrupt them to change what it was you were doing, because you don't like what they said.
That sound exactly right. His chance to read a sitch was when the gang encircled the two of them, but he chose to go straight for aggressive instead.
-
In my opinion dealing harm like that bottle is a hard move from the MC. Since the Gunlugger hadn't missed a roll i'd go for a soft move instead. In this example i'd describe how the Gunlugger is holdning the fingers of the Chopper and is having the upper hand when he sees something in the corner of his vision or maybe hear how the crowd draws for breath. I'd then ask what he does. Maybe it's read a sitch, maybe it's act under fire.
Or you could describe how the NPC is grabbing the Gunlugger in a headlock from behind or something. Any move that sets up for complication but can be avoided with a move from the PC is fine.
But you guys are right. There is no such thing as a free read a sitch everytime some shit is blowing your way.
I do however think read a sitch can be used broadly. Either before the fight starts or during the fight. It's just a matter of scale.
-
In my opinion dealing harm like that bottle is a hard move from the MC. Since the Gunlugger hadn't missed a roll i'd go for a soft move instead.
Soft move—announce future badness: the choppers gang forms a circle around you to jeer on the fist fight. We know at least some of the gang is very loyal to the chopper/hostile toward the gunlugger.
Hard Move—inflict harm—bottle to the head.
Either way, it comes down to the MC's call in play.
-
Yup. Announce future badness: So, the chopper's sitting there with his friends...And by that I mean gang of armed killers.
-
If your NPC wants to knock out the Gunlugger from behind, how you can present this situation depends on what has already happened.
If the PC has missed a roll, you can describe them getting knocked out, and that's that.
If they haven't, then you describe the NPC coming up behind the gunlugger with a bottle and ask the gunlugger: "What do you do?"
If they ignore this situation, you can describe the NPC knocking them out, exactly as if they had missed a roll.
But you can't just knock out the gunlugger from nowhere, and describing the gang standing around isn't enough of a warning to follow through with a hard move like that. "You get knocked out, that's it" is a hard move irrevocable, unalterable. "You're about to be knocked out, what are you going to do about it?" is a soft move, one you can make whenever you want, because you're giving the player the chance to react. This is basically what makes AW "fair" when there's no rolls for the GM to make on behalf of ambushing NPCs. It can also be hard to shift over to this frame of mind if you are used to other rpgs where things work more like wargames, are turn-based, and every character gets a roll to do things. Or to resist things! Because at the same time, the gunlugger doesn't get a roll unless the character actually does something. If you give the PC the soft move warning, probably they aren't going to actually read a sitch in that moment (since you have already answered that one question they want the answer to), but if they do stand around checking things out, follow through with the move and knock them out.
-
Another way to do it is to establish the threat with a soft move at the outset and spring it if the PC gives you a golden opportunity by ignoring the situation. So the Gunlugger says "I walk up to the Chopper and start bending his fingers back and yelling 'I'll kill you!'" And the GM says "Whoa, he's like surrounded by three or or four of his gang. You're not going to be able to watch all of 'em. Are you just going to walk in there?" I think Deal harm as established would now be an appropriate move here. The important part is that the player knows that there is a real and imminent danger that they ignore at their peril.
One thing to point out is the slight difference between Johnstone's wording "If your NPC wants to knock out the Gunlugger" vs. the OP who said "...i wanted an npc knock out the gunlugger." I'm probably over reading that turn of phrase. Of course, the GM is a fan of the Gunlugger and wouldn't actually root for the NPC to knock him out.
-
Well the phrase "i wanted an npc to knock him out" was AFTER he decided to challenge the chopper to a fight, doing it inside his night club, doing it while all the gangers screamed at unison "boss! boss! boss!" while encircling them, after he punched the chopper twice and said "if you don't back down, i'll kill you", after the chopper refused to back down saying "you have to kill me so, because i'll never yield", after he started bending the fingers of the chopper and bringing him to his knees and saying "now you have to humiliate yourself in front of your gang or you'll die here".
At that point, the logical consequence of all those actions in my mind was: the loyal npc takes the matters into his hands and tries to knock the gunlugger out. Did i have to use a soft move here? Perhaps, but then 1 or 2 PC would have died there. If the chopper survived because the gunlugger turned to the new threat, then the gunlugger would have died because 10 or more ganger would have killed him. If the chopper died at the hand of the gunlugger, then the gunlugger would have been dead also because of the gangers.
So i thought, to be a fan of the chopper and the gunlugger maybe the best move is to knock the gunlugger out and let the NPC take all the blame.
-
Oh! What you've described here is seizing by force. He should roll to seize by force. There'll be an exchange of harm between him and the chopper's gang, and if he fets knocked out, it'll be by the harm roll.
-Vincent
-
Yes, he seized by force the chopper all the way and won. He harmed the chopper, i harmed him with his gang and because the gang didn't follow the chopper orders, he made an example of them.
-
To your side question - it depends. I find 5 XP per session about average if your sessions are short-ish (ie 4 hours or so) BUT there are some major caveats to that. Sharp and Weird are easier to use frequently than Cool, Hard and Hot, playbook specific moves aside. So anyone with a good score in either (or both) who gets it marked is going to do a lot of Reading/Opening Brain for that session and rack up the XP. Eager To Know, Oftener Right, Inspiring, Visionary, Insight, Norman and even just someone with a good Hot who frequently Seduce/Maniuplates other PCs and similar moves can completely blow that curve.
In one online game I'm in, I've got a Touchstone with Visionary (get up to 3 hold on a PC and spend those to give XP), Inspiring (anyone who rolls to assist my character gets an XP, essentially makes Hx to my character a highlighted stat) and a decent Hot (on any 7+ can offer XP if the PC does what I want). That's going to accelerate the pace of the game just by her being there.
Now, on to KOing the Gunlugger. It looks like you were dealt a bad hand here and trying to make the best of it. My question would really be aside from the usual principles. Given the alternative is everyone having more fun (or less frustration) from your solution? If the answer is yes, then go for it because depending on your group this could be extreme, player dropping out circumstances. Now that said, its an expectation of the setting that the PC's are not actively interested in killing each other. Once they've decided that no longer applies, and there are probably perfectly good in-game reasons, someone IS going to die. Sieze By Force isn't really modeled with an eye towards PC on PC death matches and its pretty easy for anyone to figure out how the math will stack up in terms of armor, weapons and gangs. Personally, and this is my style so take it with a grain of salt, I'd probably sit those two down before the big throw down and figure out who's ok with what. Maybe the Gunlugger is just fine with seizing once, getting an XP for it and buying the Retire To Safety advance or something.
-
Sometimes being a fan of a PC means watching them die in a blaze of glory. It's not your job to keep them alive. It's your job to make apocalypse world seem real, play to find out what happens, and respond with fuckery and intermittent reward.
That's not a comment on the choices you made, only on the rationale. If it's logical for the gang to jump in, jump em in. But if the Gunlugger and Chopper try to kill each other, assuming this is an IC thing and not some weird OOC issues, someone may be rolling up a new dude.
-
It was all IC (they are good friends in real), but it was only the third session! It would have been a pity if one died so soon...
-
In one campaign the game logic and roll progression resulted two PC's fighting and one had to reroll a new character only five minutes into the game. The game is wild and brutal, but that's the charm of it.
-
Were they carrying on so with an unstated expectation that you would save them from themselves?
-
They were trying a way out as players but they couldn't as characters.
-
They were trying a way out as players but they couldn't as characters.
Neat. I love how characters can become so real that we feel an inexorable, can I dare say narrative, pull in certain directions. My knight died last night in our Pendragon game because he just wouldn't back down, even though everyone pointed out he had every excuse to retire from the field disheartened. It led to some of the most satisfying role playing I've had. Mortally wounded, he was able to see his kidnapped sister safely home and then come before the earl to plead the case of his killer, a traitor knight who had renounced his treason after our battle and saw my kidnapped sister returned to me.
Thinking about your description, I so want to see your Chopper and Gunlugger die in a massacre, and then pick things up out of the wreckage with the NPC deputy as the new Chopper and one of the other participants as the second PC.
-
If the deputy survives (the chopper broke almost all his bones, and the gunlugger said he would kill him) he will become a Driver as the second character of our battlebabe :D
The situation evolved in a strange way to be honest... our Angel (a woman) seduced both the chopper and the gunlugger, had a threesome with them and made them promise to stop their childish behavior using sex as a leverage. It seems it worked out, except for the part that the Angel was the Battlebabe fiancee (well, he was using her while she was in love with him) and she had to tell him because she was feeling guilty (because 15 years before she made the same mistake and got pregnant).
Now is the battlebabe that wants to kill both the chopper and the battlebabe... but this time in cold blood, not in a heated fistfight.
I think this group is shortlived. :D
-
First up: Awesome. If your PCs die at each other's hands in a blaze of glory, well, that's just a fantastic end, even if it makes for a short campaign.
Second: That is a perfect opportunity to bring in a new threat that threatens them all. Offer them an opportunity at the cost of their desired revenge. If the players want an excuse to set aside the PvP, something bigger and badder than them is in your toolkit.
Or, y'know, the first one :D That's still fantastic.
-
I am a big fan of using Do Something Under Fire as a passive-perception/reactive-dodge type move.
E.g.,
PC: "So I take another swing at the Chopper..."
Me: "Wait, roll to do it under fire."
PC: "Uh, ok, why...?"
Me: "Roll and find out."
PC: "Sure, that's, um, a... 9."
Me: "So, you catch movement out of the corner of your eye: this guy is going to bash you in the back of the head with bottle. You can suffer that damage, OR you can block him but then take -1 on your punching."
PC: "Shite. I'll risk the -1."
Me: "OK, you deflect the incoming blow at the last minute. Now Sieze By Force, but at -1..."
etc.
-- 77IM