Show Posts
1
roleplaying theory, hardcore / Re: Genuinely curious: Why do you like Apocalypse World?
« on: February 19, 2016, 04:27:33 PM »
No game can withstand determined bad faith on the part of the players, particularly if one of those players is the MC. So nope, AW ain't magic, and it can't fix a bad group.
But here's what I love: the MC's Agendas, Principles, and Moves? Those are RULES. Explicit, first order, no-shit fundamentals of how the game works, as critical and integrated as "roll 2d6+stat" or anything else with a number or tags attached. You've looked over the MC tri-fold, yeah? Or the First Session one? Those core elements: the Agendas, the Principles, the Moves are first and foremost, hammered on over and over again in the text. There's even in-depth explanation of what each of those means: if the MC isn't following them, they're not playing by the rules of the game, and you can point out where it says so, right there on the page.
Threats also do quite a bit of legwork for helping the MC come up with something when the table's looking at them expectantly, or somebody rolls snake-eyes. Any problem they throw at you is going to fall into one of those threat-buckets, each of which comes with a list of moves that's a good fit for that sort of problem. Those threat move lists are in addition to their default move options; if anything, there can be too many inspirations/lists of potential complications to chose from!
There's no directive to make things shitty, and clear and explicit direction not to play in an antagonistic way. My take? If you need to make up complications for what the consequences of failure are, you shouldn't have been rolling in the first place: there's a reason establishing future badness is one of the MC's moves. It should be clear from the fiction what's at stake, and backing up and re-explaining there's a bear beneath the wall, and letting players reconsider their course of action in that context is repeatedly hammered on as good play in the examples.
An MC one who thinks GMing is a universally fungible skill and doesn't read the rules before running the game? Yeah, you're going to have a bad time. But I'll happily take the explicit safety net of Agenda, Principles, and Moves over the usual calvinball on the GM's side of the screen in other systems any day of the week.
But here's what I love: the MC's Agendas, Principles, and Moves? Those are RULES. Explicit, first order, no-shit fundamentals of how the game works, as critical and integrated as "roll 2d6+stat" or anything else with a number or tags attached. You've looked over the MC tri-fold, yeah? Or the First Session one? Those core elements: the Agendas, the Principles, the Moves are first and foremost, hammered on over and over again in the text. There's even in-depth explanation of what each of those means: if the MC isn't following them, they're not playing by the rules of the game, and you can point out where it says so, right there on the page.
Threats also do quite a bit of legwork for helping the MC come up with something when the table's looking at them expectantly, or somebody rolls snake-eyes. Any problem they throw at you is going to fall into one of those threat-buckets, each of which comes with a list of moves that's a good fit for that sort of problem. Those threat move lists are in addition to their default move options; if anything, there can be too many inspirations/lists of potential complications to chose from!
There's no directive to make things shitty, and clear and explicit direction not to play in an antagonistic way. My take? If you need to make up complications for what the consequences of failure are, you shouldn't have been rolling in the first place: there's a reason establishing future badness is one of the MC's moves. It should be clear from the fiction what's at stake, and backing up and re-explaining there's a bear beneath the wall, and letting players reconsider their course of action in that context is repeatedly hammered on as good play in the examples.
An MC one who thinks GMing is a universally fungible skill and doesn't read the rules before running the game? Yeah, you're going to have a bad time. But I'll happily take the explicit safety net of Agenda, Principles, and Moves over the usual calvinball on the GM's side of the screen in other systems any day of the week.