I was hoping to DL it to run an L5R one-shot, but I see it's been taken down. Does anyone have the files downloaded and could you perhaps email or link them to me? You would be my favorite apocalyptica-barfer of all time, forever.

Thanks everyone for the advice. Appreciate you taking the time to read all this.

@Ebok Yeah, I really agree screwing up the initial Seize by Force arbitration was unfortunate -- that had a chance to change the direction of the fight in an interesting way.

As for your tips #2 and #3, that's taken care of. I didn't provide additional story context around the fight itself, but suffice to say they were conflicted going into the fight as to whether it was the right thing to do, and that conflict will carry forward into interesting outcomes, along with the fact that Dremmer's faction is just as dangerous in its collapse.

I have to confess, though, that I disagree with some of your guidance about how to represent violence overall in the game -- I think if I had made this fight last 2-3 rolls, the players would've been really disappointed. This Threat has been in play since the second session of the game, and this is the second-to-last session (I'm moving cross-country, so we're wrapping up). I agree that most violence should be resolved in a couple of rolls, per your tips #1 and #5. But I stipulated that this was a climactic fight, rather than the constant violence that characterizes life in the Apocalypse. The system is equipped to zoom in fairly granularly, so why not take that opportunity once in a while/campaign?

@Daniel Wood -- I think I agree that at least one of the AUF moves should've been SBF or Go Aggro instead, but I also think that the text off the rules supports a broader reading of the AUF move than you are taking. In the book in the example fight between the Brainer and three goons, on page 158, the MC is about to rule that her attempting to grab the last goon with her Violation Glove is acting under fire (the fire presumably being a counterattack), but then opts to let the In-Brain Puppet Strings move proceed per normal, remembering that the NPC is incapable of counterattacking at that moment. This is mentioned again on page 167 under "When an NPC Attacks" -- "Usually what you'll do instead is put someone in a spot: 'Fisty opens fire on you. What do you do?' If the character does anything much, she's doing it under fire." I think a counterattack can absolutely be the Fire for AUF. You're right about my out-of-game motivations, though -- I did it to draw out the fight. AUF allows for the NPC to avoid harm if the player fails, but it also allows the PC to avoid harm if they succeed, whereas SBF does not -- by default, everyone takes harm.

First, some background: Last session, the two PCs in my AW game rode into the desert to face down Dremmer, a warlord who is uniting the clans of nomadic raiders for an attack on the PC's home, a ruined city containing a handful of hardholds. Through some cultural finagling, they were able to challenge him to ritual combat to dispute his leadership of his band of nomads. Here's how the ritual challenges go down:

The two duelists are in the center of a ring drawn in the sand, say 15 meters across. They each have a melee weapon of their choice, or a firearm with a single bullet. Each of them have two seconds fort he duel, their right-and-left-hand guys. The seconds mount up on their offroad motorcycles, the conveyance of choice for nomad raider scum. They're armed as well, with the traditional spear of the nomads, or other melee weapons like chain lengths, morning stars, etc. These spears are often tipped with grenades, but for the purposes of these ritual combats, they're just sharp as fuck. The spears get stuck into the ground at the quarters of the circle. Each rider idles next to his. When the presiding priest gives the signal, they begin to ride around in a circle. As they're passing their spear for the third time, they pull it out of the sand and the duel begins. The riders form the ring of the duel, and are allowed to interfere to help their principle -- part of the strategy is to lure your opponent towards your seconds and avoid the enemy seconds. The seconds are also allowed to interfere with one another, killing or otherwise forcing them out of the circle.

Here's basically how the fight went down, as best I can remember:

-Dremmer had a spear, Shieldbearer had a hand axe, each of which do 3-harm. Each are wearing 2-armor gear. Dremmer has a custom move -- when he deals harm to you, you also take s-harm. His blows keep his opponents reeling and off-balance. He also is tougher than the average mook -- he will go down after 3 harm, not 1-2.

-Dremmer tries to keep Shieldbearer at bay with his superior reach. Shieldbearer uses his axe to splinter the haft of the spear. I rule it a Seize By Force, Shieldbearer gets 10+, I rule the spear is split in two -- haft and point -- and he deals 3-harm to Dremmer, reduced to 1-harm by armor.

-Dremmer rushes forward to get inside hand range with a grapple, striking with his fists at the Shieldbearer's unprotected face. Shieldbearer responds by trying to counter-grapple Dremmer and throw him to the sand. I rule it Act Under Fire (the fire is Dremmer's assault), Shieldbearer gets a 7-9. I rule Dremmer gets a shot in, 1-harm AP, but the Shieldbearer successfully throws him to the ground, and is on top of him. Shieldbearer is now also reeling from Dremmer's strike, which has cracked his cheekbone (s-harm). I forget to make him make the harm move. Derp.

-Shieldbearer now tries to choke Dremmer out with the axe handle. Acting Under Fire (because of the s-harm), gets a 7-9. I rule he chokes him a bit, but then Dremmer throws him off and rolls away. 1-harm AP to Dremmer for the choke.

-At this point, the Shieldbearer's player says "I read a sitch." Technically, not supposed to do that, since you're not supposed to name your moves. I let him roll, though, and he gets a 7-9. Spends a hold to ask "What should I watch out for." I say "Well, while you were getting your bearings, Dremmer picked up the head of his broken spear and threw it right at you, so you should probably watch out for the razor-sharp blade spinning towards your chest." 3-harm to the Shieldbearer, dropped down to 1-harm by armor. He makes the harm move with a 6-. But he has s-harm again.

-Next up, Dremmer charges at the Shieldbearer, trying to push him into the ring, into one of his henchmen. Acting under fire, the Shieldbearer misses entirely, and is shoved in front of a speeding ATV (one of Dremmer's seconds is riding an ATV rather than a motorbike). One of his seconds, The Driver (the other PC), attempts to aid him by stabbing the ATV driver to slow him down or drive him off-course. He succeeds, and the ATV driver swerves at the last minute, clipping the shieldbearer rather than running him down, and dropping his weapon, a length of chain. I rule it 2-harm AP, since being rammed by things is generally AP. He fails the harm move with a 10+, I choose that he looses his footing and drops his axe.

-Shieldbearer gets up, sees that Dremmer has his axe, and has moved near the center of the ring. He picks up the chain length, wraps it around his hand as a gauntlet. Having learned his lesson from last time, he says "I crounch into a fighting stance, move away from the edge of the ring, and get my bearings," triggering Read a Sitch. He gets 1-hold, and asks what he should watch out for. I tell him that Dremmer, in addition to getting the axe, has stuck the spearpoint in the sand and may intend to use it as a surprise weapon if it comes to another grapple.

-Shieldbearer wants to make an end of it, and charges, saying he's going to snatch up the spearpoint as his weapon, and parry Dremmer's axe stroke with his chain gauntlet as he strikes. I call it Act Under Fire, the firing being Dremmer's counter-attack. He hits a 10+, and deals his 3-harm to Dremmer, killing him, and recieving no harm in return. Shieldbearer ends the fight having taking 4-harm.

Overall, everyone was happy with the fight -- it was exciting and dramatic with some twists and turns. The Shieldbearer PC felt a little cheated at two points:

-He felt he should've gotten more advantage from having Dremmer grappled early in the fight, and that Dremmer escaped too easily.
-He was a little put out by the result of his first 'read a sitch,' when he got hit with the thrown spearpoint because he was too busy getting his bearings.

Thoughts on that? Anything else I did that doesn't give with your GMing style? Any advice for stuff like this?

I'm wondering when to reveal the specific wording and conversational triggers of custom moves to the PCs. Take some examples from the book:

"If you’re in a fist fight with Rolfball and you take harm, you take s-harm (ap) in addition to the usual harm."

When to share this? The first time someone gets punched by Rolfball? Or should I work to share it earlier? Like, maybe have an NPC tell them "You need to watch out for this motherfucker Rolfball, he's got fists like engine blocks, and when he punches you down you don't get up," and then share the custom move with them?

Likewise, this one:
When you scavenge in the ruins, roll+sharp.
On a 10+, choose two and find an oddment worth 1-barter. On a 7–9, choose one and find an oddment worth 1-barter:
• You find it quickly.
• You find it with relatively little trouble.
• You find an item that is valuable.
• You find an item that is hi-tech

Share it when they discover the ruins? When the ruins are discussed in conversation? Or the first time they scavenge them?

How do folks approach these moves?

One other thing to note -- and it's totally abhorrent to modern morality -- is that at the time, slavery was a moral innovation, and it's possible that Vikings and Anglo Saxons saw it that way. Let's say you're a Viking, and you've just raided a town. You're taking everything they've got, and you've killed some or all of the able-bodied, soldier-aged men. What to do with the people who are left? Kill them? That's pretty harsh, and it will stiffen resistance on your next raid. Leave them behind? Well, you've just taken all their shit and killed their defenders -- leaving them might be dooming them to death anyway. Take them with you into your household, as a slave? It might be the kindest choice.

Not that any of that holds up today, but Dark Ages force people into awful ethical calculus.

Perfect, that's what I figured. Thanks!

Yes, rights drive the story. Some rights also give you additional abilities, and I don't know why you would say they're not for that. I really don't think it's correct to say that every player can do any of the things that every playbook gives rights to. Can the War Captain decide to "Step out of [his] earthly life and journey in other places."? You might say, "Of course! But he has no right to expect it to work when he tries." But that's not really any different than saying a first level fighter CAN cast magic missile, but has no right to expect it to happen, or for it to deal 1d4 damage. It might be technically true, but it strains the definition of "can" and "cast magic missile." 

The reason I'm asking This right seems like it's trying to do both of those things, but by granting a right that everyone already has. It's like if Hamlet's right that you wrote read: "You have the right to be King of Denmark. Treat this as Winning Someone Over."