I think this is something that should definitely be addressed. I am definitely no artist, and it would be nice to get some guidance on how best to handle this part of it all.

Oh, I hope we keep the ambiguity. The ambiguity is part of the reason I assumed that Bloodless Xristos broadly covered all Abrahamic religions, and I like that fact! I want my playgroup to be able to define the religions for their setting themselves, rather than the books; that's why I love the original Apocalypse World, and that should be no less true for this one.

Also, please don't be afraid to potentially insert new possible faiths and such. There's no need just to stick to real ones. Other than the big ones, the rest should be easily removed if unliked, and it might be interesting to see some things that never were.

Then again, that might force you to write more playbooks, so I suppose its up to you (or perhaps expansion playbook material?)

Hmmm, I read that playbook as very much saying "there is a literal dragon, and it will treat you as an equal." There's no reason you couldn't slightly tweak the playbook to be about any other doom, though: a plague or anything. I bet it would rule! But it'd be different for sure. This playbook promises a big-ass dragon to me, real and deadly.

As it should. It just doesn't have to be a flying lizard-esque dragon. It has to be huge, it has to have a vast and patient hunger, and has to distort the environment to reflect its nature. All other aspects are up to you to define, and nothing in any of that inherently screams flying lizard.

Well, proto-Christianity was basically just a sect of Judaism. Their tenets didn't deviate too much for the first few years of presence, other than to eliminate the reliance on Rabbis and older traditions. As time went on, they adopted baptism, many of the classical tenets of altruism, and expanded the holy texts with books of their own.

Maybe it's my fault for implying I meant old-world Judaism (which was largely extinct by that time period, having been replaced by a new orthodoxy that only sort-of held onto those classic beliefs), but I was talking more of the "liberal" Judaism that existed in the 1st century and helped give rise to Christianity as we know it today.

But if that's not what you were implying, does your setting basically assume no Jewish analog gave birth to the Bloodless Xristos faith?

I'm glad there won't be changes to the stat names or different stats. I always felt that these specific stats are sort of based around core protagonist excellencies in the context of fiction. Cool is based around the protagonist that is unshakably resolute, and does not flinch to danger or threat (pretty much every antihero in fiction). Hard is based around the protagonist that is unassailable in battle (Conan, who could never lose a battle so long as his back was against a wall). Hot is based around the protagonist that commands the room with their presence and can speak people to tears or action (Mel Gibson's interpretation of William Wallace). Sharp is based around the protagonist that lets nothing miss their eye (Sherlock Holmes). And Weird is sort of a wildcard for all those mysterious forces that permeate fiction, and the tendency for protagonists to be special in the context of their use (the Dragonborn of Skyrim).

What other stats could you really possibly use that capture these classic protagonist cliches, and why would they be superior? Why change the names, when they are signature to the original game?

We don't actually disagree, Decivre.  I was indeed talking about the mechanical definitions of game balance that Simulationist and Gamist approaches tend to abide by (i.e., affective parity), and you are of course correct in your observations about shared narrative influence.  Well said.  Alas, I fear we have strayed even further from Radan's OP.

But to some extent, mechanical elements are part and parcel to narrative balance. For example, I have no doubt that the lack of situational modifiers in AW is intentional; most games that have them have serious balance issues with regards to using skills (if one skill incites more penalties than another skill in more situations, then it is not as effective). Furthermore, stat layouts in AW follow fairly specific guidelines that have been detailed on this forum. That wouldn't exist if mechanical balance weren't part of narrative balance.

But I agree, this digression is a bit much.

even the author of AW, Vincent himself, answered me, that the Operator is involved in the gigs (THANK YOU AGAIN, dear Vincent!:)).

Yeah, I thought that was pretty cool. Always nice to have your statements lauded by the creator.

The forum won't allow me to quote you entirely, so I'm going to brief your questions and whatnot. Please don't be offended if I didn't not brief them too accurately.

Why are all gigs worth different amounts of barter despite requiring the same number of rolls and effective effort?

Remember that consequences are a core element of Apocalypse World. Yes, murdering people does give you more money than making business trades, despite having the same effective difficulty. But you piss less people off by making trades than by murdering their friends and family.

MCs should snowball events off their PC's actions. If they're murdering people for quick cash, they should expect that to bite them in the ass down the line.

Is a night enough time to moonlight, or do you need more time?

You could, theoretically, do your moonlighting literally at night. As long as you have downtime during the night. But it's up to the MC to decide what is "enough time" for you to do your moonlighting thing. For instance, at my old table, the operator needed at least one full free day to do his moonlighting. That means no other interactions and adventures... he's spending the next day doing odd jobs for quick jingle.

It is possible to got +1 juggling WITH gig (SEE SEX MOVE of the Operator ;) ) or as independent advancement?

So far as I can see, you always get more juggling when you get a new gig. It's part of the Moonlighting move.

As a rule of thumb, once you get the advancement that allows you to lose an obligation gig, you can just stop keeping track of juggling. You always have enough.

I think, that the Operator should be (or at least COULD BE) busy more with OPERATING (with crew etc.) than in other stuff (especially if not connected with the ROLE of the Operator).

The Operator is technically always working a gig. In a sense, the core plot of your AW game is itself a broader gig that your operator is a part of. The Moonlighting move is more about the things he does when he's not chasing the plot of your game.

What I mean is relationship as crew BELONG to the Operator (as present time EMLOYEES) and not just PARTICIPATING (as the gang with the Chopper - even as alpha role).

No, the crew doesn't belong to the Operator. They too are moonlighting, and thus taking time away from their day jobs and lives to help the operator out for quick cash. Which is why your crew doesn't have any hard mechanics really associated with them. They aren't like the Chopper's gang, who is loyal and follows him into battle. They are a bunch of misfit mercenaries looking for bank, and you're finding them jobs.

Is the relationship between an operator and their crew comparable to an employer and their employees?

--- Uff, it was not easy to think about it even in my native language ;). ---

I can imagine.

You can probably think of the relationship between a crew and the operator as similar to the relationship between an athlete and an agent. The agent finds athlete potential work, but it is inevitably the athlete that decides whether they want to do it. The big difference between the operator and the agent is that the operator is himself an "athlete". He isn't just looking for jobs for other people, but ones he can make cash from himself.

And in the end, it's the operator's name that will be tied to the success or failure of a gig. Not the crew's.

NEW QUESTION - can the CREW HELPING WITH THE OBLIGATIONS also?!

That's up to you and your MC to decide if it is relevant. As is true with any and every gig. For example, I don't particularly see why you would need your crew for a "F*cking" gig. Unless it's group s*x, or something....

Wow, just learned that this site has a language filter. Crazy.