Hi. I have a question about "shut someone down" move. In our PBF session, we have a ghost and a rusalka. The scene is as following - both of them are in the abandoned mansion, where the ghost lives. Rusalka is peeking around, ghost is in her darkest self, immaterial and unable to do anything except interacting with objects. Rusalka discovered some hidden room, with some witchy stuff. Ghost thinks it's related to the mystery of her death and she said she wants to take a magic book rusalka is picking up, and hit her with it right in the face. Now, rusalka have no idea that this strange thing doing some poltergeist-like stuff is our ghost.

My problem is - our MC, without the ghost player even saying what she wants to do, what is her intention, said she should pick - is she using shut somebody down, or lash out physically. I think none of the moves can be used, because ghost is in her darkest self. She is unable to shut somebody down - they are not in this kind of interaction, rusalka doesn't even know the ghost is the one hitting her. My opinion is MC should rather let rusalka decide - is she struggling and doesn't want to let the book go? Is she in shock so book hits her, and what later? Do you think ghost in darkest self is able to lash out physically (move implies there have to be some struggle, trading harm both ways etc) or shut someone down? Using only material objects?

(sorry for my bad english, not a native speaker)?

After the last game, one of my players was complaining, that there was not enough action.
I know my MCing sucked that day greatly. Players was 2 hours late and I got very upset. I'm not happy with my performance at all.

The main thing is, I still feel uneasy with creating scenes that include fighting, violence etc. It's not cause of some tabu. It's cause I don't know how to do this in interesting way, so I prefer not to do this.

Anyone have a good advice to that?

Sad thing is that after the last session that player said he wants to quit.

All NPCs, when they have / developed an agenda.

Like Matt Wilson said here:
http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=37.msg136#msg136

I dunno if Vx means it this way, but I'm reading "threat" as "people in your life who don't do exactly what you want them to because they have their own pesky wants and needs" and not "dudes you have to fight." They threaten the easiness of your life. They threaten its boringness.

But, when it comes to hardholders, for me - they are perfect threats, even if they are hiring PCs. Think what would he do, if they will take some job and totally blow it?

http://www.lumpley.com/apocalypse/blog/?p=175

Here ;).

I think what would be wrong here would be if the gunlugger attacks some random goons, separated from the leader, and you're like, "Oh but uh... one of them works as a leader for them even though they're just a bunch of goons! Yeah! That's the ticket!"

Well, naturally I don't want to do things like this!

But in the first scene my NPC Dork was introduced, funlugger visited him and I described Dork as a sergeant, working for Foster (NPC, leader of the holding). I said Dork's job include stuff like leading members of the gang; I mean, in a fight / battle.

Now, in the fight scene, we have funlugger, Dork and some gangers. I think it's crystal clear that Dork will lead them.


My point is, this rule about gang fights refers to gang leader. If it's a PC - chopper, hardholder, other characters that bought a gang as an improvement - it's all clear. it's their gang, they are leading it (with "pack alpha" or "leadership").

But when a gang consists all of NPC, and this gang is a part of "warlord" threat. The leader of the gang can be anyone. Fiction in the first place.

Yeah, basically followers give 1-fortune, only hocus itself have options to choose from for followers (like +1 fortune).
Think it's logical, if you're a hocus, you're fuckin' special. Right? It's not so easy to have followers and I like it.


Only the operator isn't fuckin' special, cause almost everyone can get "2 gigs (detail) and moonlighting" and don't have to take an obligation gig! And do the same gigs as operator.

And, improving and taking "moonlighting" as an improvement option "get a move from another playbook" - you can do this, but it's pointless. Better to take "get 2 gigs (detail) and moonlighting" (I know, not all characters can do that, but it's logical why and why not).


Anyway, I think I know what I will do with my savvyhead, who wants to be "a no shit driver".

I'll write a profile for his car, but first I'll tell him to work on this.

Other vehicles
A savvyhead with a proper workspace can create more extreme vehicles than cars and bikes, with stats up to +3 and who knows what all attached to it. Driver or chopper + savvyhead with a garage, that’s a fun game.

When it comes time to write up a savvyhead’s new creations:
• If it’s a vehicle, give it its profile, and you can go up to +3 for power, looks and weakness, and up to like 4-armor or some crazy shit — plus whatever’s mounted on it. Give it its frame, strengths, looks and weaknesses, and you aren’t limited to the lists available to choppers and drivers. Expand them as seems good.

tell me if you have other ideas, or think my logic is wrong!

The answer is no!

Thanks!

So, if my savvyhead have a workspace that's in a schoolbus, and wants to pick "a no shit driver" move, what should I do?

Tell him to write down some stats for it, but adjust car stats acordingly to the fiction? (like, he never told us the car is armored, so armor-0 etc?)

Is this just me, or there's something wrong with this file?
All pictures are just looking crappy.