Why was I not informed about this awesomeness?

The tragedy is, it would have been such an easy thing to do. Someone could have simply sat me down and said to me in a calm, clear voice,  "Tavis, Sage can whip nunchucks around like a hundred times per second.".

Or posted about it here!

Last session of my OD&D campaign, the PC Ookla the Mok needed to be raised from the dead, leading to us doing a round of at-the-table individual actions/carousing for each of the two weeks in which he recuperated. I continue to find that the AW moves serve me best when we're in town, where time-scales, spatial relationships, and dangers are all relatively fluid and abstract. In the confines of the dungeon later this session, where the party tends to cohere as a unit and my resources for making trouble for them are more exactly specified, I found myself reaching for our usual OD&D ways of resolving things. (See exception below).

I find that I'm happy making up moves on the fly. I didn't give players the Dungeon World move sheet, and when I referred to it myself usually none of the moves was just right so I created my own to suit the occasion. I think that moves are important in AW, and less so for me, because:

- the structure of the AW moves tell you what the game is about; you're going to want to be concerned with whether people trust you, you're going to come under fire and seize things by force, etc. Adding moves to our existing game means we already have a feel for what it's about.

- the transparency of the AW moves assure players that this is a game with rules and that they can have some control over how they get screwed by a bad roll. Our OD&D resolution system runs on our established trust that, as a fan of the PCs, I want to see them get screwed in ways we'll all enjoy playing out. It also creates an expectation that some of the surprise for the players will come from my keeping some rules & game elements on my side of the screen; the moves work well with our expectation that the surprise for me will come from how the dice and player actions interact.

Here are some of the moves I remember from this in-town phase:

The fighting men Ookla and John Fighter devoted a week to re-asserting their bond with their intelligent swords and trying to explore the weapons' power. The OD&D rules for this aren't sufficiently dynamic to suit me, but I wanted to use them as a baseline. In OD&D your ability to master your sword's ego depends on your Strength and Intelligence. I didn't want to use dual bonuses, so I asked the players whether they wanted to prepare for this trial through mental or physical exercise. The OD&D rules also say that swords are materialistic (like special interests/carousing, this is another example of an Arnesonian treasure sink), so I also let them get a bonus to the roll based on what they spent.

Ookla the Mok's player rolled in the 7-9 zone, so as he asserted his will over his sword Thirster I gave him a choice of:

- what powers does Thirster have that I don't know about?
- what is Thirster's immediate goal?
- what is Thirster trying to hide from you?

He chose goal, so I told him it was to leave Ookla for a more powerful wielder, Captain Rakotis, who the Church of the Killing Frost was maneuvering into place to bring the sword under their banner (setting up a PC-NPC-PC triangle with E.N. Lightenment, a PC cleric of that church).

John Fighter's player rolled a 2, a failure even after spending 1,100 gp hiring people at the Temple of the Skyfather to create a shrine for his sword Heart of the Mok where acolytes would be hired to recite its deeds four times a day. As my move in response to this failure, I decided that this would awaken the sword's materialism and ability to speak, neither of which have been prominent in the campaign until now: "You gave me my name, and now hearing it I have more words. I want to hear others speak my name more often! I want my name written in more letters of gold! Large letters of gold!"

E.N. Lightenment sacrificed corn, barley, alfalfa, and any other valuables he could get his hands on in order to ask the Killing Frost about the frost giants who were its other servants. His player rolled in the 7-9 range, so I gave him a choice of:

- a vision of the nearest giants
- what they were planning
- why they were here

He chose the vision, and then went back for another successful attempt to gain the other two. Here, I set up a PC-NPC-PC triangle by having the frost giants planning an attack on the character's Lawful patron Patriarch Zekon, which was supported by E.N.'s Chaotic superior Deaconess Caja.

The final AW-style move I used as we wrapped up the dungeon portion of the session was when John Fighter, expecting to go toe-to-toe with a fearsome elemental, quaffed the potion of heroism he'd been saving for the moment when he hoped to sire a worthy heir to his lost throne. The fight ended sooner than expected, so he decided to use the remaining duration of the potion to attempt to sire the heir on a nearby werebear named Broomhilda. I really wanted that to happen, so I didn't dice for the success, only the consequences. On a 7-9, he chose the first out of these:

- Broomhilda will still respect you
- you will not incur the jealousy of Berries, a male member of the werebear den
- word of these events will not reach Patriarch Zekon

Response from James_Nostack on hearing about this in the session writeup:

(picks jaw up off the floor)

Props for an innovative use of a magical item, but I think this means your heir is a bear.

I'd love to play actual Dungeon World with folks sometime to see how things work differently in a game that's been using this approach from the start & applies it to actual dungeons.

I felt like I understood less about MCing after playing the scenario than I did when I'd just read AW without playing!

I don't think it's well-designed to do anything, except maybe to showcase situation moves.

Paradox resolved; the disconnect b/w my experience of the scenario and rulebook is because I do think the Apocalypse World rulebook is exceptionally well-designed to help the reader understand what the game is meant to be! Thanks.

The rewritten Famine definitely fits with Severian (and thus with the idea that this playbook could be a dark redeemer, not just a dick). No specific examples from the book come to mind, but one way you can look at the genesis of Book of the New Sun is as Catholic theology turned into something people at a SF convention would want to wear as a masquerade costume - so the idea of fasting as purification, inspiring people to give up their worldly attachments to better contemplate the ultimate, totally works for me.

(Another way to look at where the New Sun came from is that Wolfe sat down with the OED, contemplated all the possible ways the words therein could be combined, and one by one rejected all the ones that weren't perfect expressions of awesomeness).

I would totally go for this, reaching for Severian & his destrier from the Book of the New Sun with this image in mind.

Remember, one of the things an apocalypse means is revelation, and Severian is going to destroy the world of the old sun to bring about the new one. So I see the horseman as a man in black, and a torturer, but not necessarily a villain.

Thanks! Your comments are very helpful - I will make those changes in our next revision, and clarify the things that are unclear.

The issue of spending is going to change in the next revision - it's a hangover from our old carousing system, but in actual (forum) play:
- being able to spend more to get a +3 bonus means there's less interesting failure than I'd like
- there's already an incentive to spend more, because you earn XP for each GP spent
- the relationship between how much you spend and the task you want to achieve doesn't always make sense in the fiction (this is true for our old system as well).

I think the way I should handle the invisible stalker is that the spell tells you the kind of information the stalker acquires; the move tells you how well you can benefit from it. For example, on a partial success choose 1:
- you learn everything there is to know from the stalker's report
- the stalker's interest in venality does not cause you to learn anything you don't want to know
- the stalker is undetected

So far, spending aside I'm very pleased with the way carousing is working out for us, and your revisions are making at least some of the moves feel as solid and polished as the AW gold standard. I'll be interested to see tomorrow how & when we use AW moves in table play, but I think the prognosis is good for carousing as an add-on to anybody's D&D that fits into the back-in-town zone that's normally unstructured.

Some new moves, more original as we start using them for carousing and between-session events in the Red Box forums.

One that's not based on spending - "+bright" is the descriptor that we use to mean high intelligence (this could be "-dim" except I know the PC in question is a magic-user and thus automatically bright, even if also dim).

When you **spy using an invisible stalker**, roll + bright. On a 10+, all 3; on a 7-9, choose 1. On a failure, the stalker brings you information you wish you hadn't learned. In any case, you gain a report from the stalker concerning its activities, as per the spell description.
 * The stalker goes beyond simple observation, using initiative and cunning to delve beneath the surface.
 * The stalker's interest in venality generates information which you will also find interesting.
 * The stalker avoids encountering or leaving traces for anyone who might detect its presence.

This one riffs off a spell invented by the player whose move involved an invisible stalker:

Invisible Stalker
Level:3
Like the more powerful level 6 spell, Invisible Stalker conjures an extra-dimensional monster which can be controlled by the Magic-User who summoned it. This lesser monster is suited only for the task of spying. The caster designates one creature, and the stalker will spy on the target for up to two days, then return to the caster to report on what it saw and heard. The invisible stalker is a twisted creature obsessed with corruption and venality. If sent to stalk a good or virtuous creature it will become bored and quickly return with a perfunctory report. If, however, its target engages in violent or lewd acts, it will watch as long as possible, and give a disgusting, vivid, overly-detailed account of all that it saw. In no event will the stalker attack – if attacked it instantly returns to the caster or the non-dimension from whence it came.

Here are some trial carouses for spending gold to learn info:

The iffy element in the general "open your mind" move as a carouse is what you spend the money on (magic mushrooms? offerings to a spirit guide? entry fee to a delphic oracle?)

When you open yourself to mystic revelation, roll + spend. On a hit, the DM will tell you something new and interesting about the lore you seek, and might ask you a question or two: answer them. On a 10+, the DM will give you good detail. On a 7-9, the DM will give you an impression. If you already know all there is to know, the DM will tell you that.

The next two are my revisions of one suggested by Oban:

One has the flavor of spending to get access to private libraries full of contradictory sources, booksellers with possible forgeries, payments to unreliable sages, etc.

When you delve into occult secrets, roll + spend. You earn XP equal to the spend. On a 10+, you can choose 3; On a 7-9, only 1.
You learn a fragment of truth without the context that makes its meaning clear.
You gain two bits of lore; one is true and one is false, but you don't know which.
You test the truth of your theories; the DM asks you five questions, and then either confirms the truth of all your answers or supplies a disproof of one.
You discover what you already know that is relevant to the object of your search.
You decide what you most want to know, and identify where you'd have to go to learn it.

One that seems most appropriate for streetwise-type investigations - paying informants, spreading cash to see who can lead you to what you want to know, offering rewards for info, etc.

When you hunt for information, roll + spend. You earn XP equal to the spend. On a 10+, you can ask 3 questions of the DM; on a 7-9, ask 1.
Who knows the most about this?
What source of useful knowledge about this is the most accessible to me?
Who wants to keep this from being known?
Who else is looking for this?
What do those who know this want that I could supply?

One that responds to a player's specific goal of seeking a bird of prey for his ranger:

When you seek a remarkable bird of prey, roll + spend. You gain XP equal to your spend. 10+, choose 3; 7-9, choose 1. In any case, they are at minimum fine examples of their species, able to follow basic commands like stay, circle overhead, stay on watch, attack, etc.
One of the birds has a supernatural ability of your choice.
You buy a number of birds before selecting the ones you wish to keep; selling the others gives you gold equal to half your spend.
One of the birds remembers intriguing sights or experiences from its time with a former owner.
Remarkable bond; you gain a +1 to moves involving these birds.
In the course of making your purchases, you meet a contact who you feel may be useful; the DM will ask you questions about why this is so.

Johnstone, my personal hangup is not about "does advancement make sense in the fiction" - a primary pleasure of RPGs for me is the process of making unexpected sense out of nonsense - but "do the criteria for advancement cause me to think about things that feel intrusively different from thinking about what my character wants to do next."

Thinking about the example of D&D makes me realize that although most of the time I don't get this disconnect, I do when the player-knowledge that I'm only 100 XP away from leveling up causes me to want to take more risks than my character normally would. I'm fine with that because a) it happens infrequently and b) the rest of the time I've internalized a way of making sense of the overlap between player & character motivations that comes naturally to me.

Vincent, you're quite right that my issues here are ones of how things feel to me & I won't really know that until I've played with it for a while, and Johnstone, your suggestions for how to think of what advancement means to characters may well help me internalize it when I do. Thanks!