First answer:

It was on the hard moves list at one point, but I removed it because it wasn't benefiting the fiction. There's a trap hidden inside of "hard move: give someone a Condition," one that takes the story away from the PCs in a not-good way.

Social stigma doesn't just appear. It's the product of specific people being shitty to one another. So, at the very least, the hard move should be "An NPC gives a Condition to a PC." Otherwise, you, as the MC, are reaching into the fiction and dealing out stigma as a player. If we're to uphold the "to do it, do it" principle, then it's important that every Condition stem from a specific character doing/saying a specific thing.

But giving NPCs that power to attach stigma and social value statements to PCs is serious business! And since we're here to be fans of the PCs, and our NPCs are to be treated like stolen cars... having that social power planted in the hands of anyone you choose is going to lead to a situation where the players are navigating your social rules, rather than you reacting to their social power. That's an observation that came out of playtesting. It made the game less Monsterhearts, more Vampire: the Masquerade.

So, the solution: NPCs can spend their Strings to place Conditions. This means that only characters who have emotional leverage over PCs can fuck up their social standing. This keeps the "NPC giving a Condition to a PC" interaction grounded in a PC and their relationships, rather than grounded in an MC's characters and choices.

Quote from: Meserach on March 14, 2012, 02:51:39 PM

My big concern with basic moves not helping to resolve situations is that players are going to avoid using them, since they don't help them get what they want, and instead just lead to further problems, or create mechanical tags (Conditions, Strings, Harm) which MIGHT help resolve a problem in the future but whose connection to such a resolution is fuzzy and unsure.

That is not an experience I've had in play, nor one I've had reported to me by playtesters. Have players been avoiding them in your game? If this issue is surfacing in your game, let me know and we can workshop it.

History: At one point "hold steady" suffered from this kind of avoidance, because the 10 up result was simply "you keep your cool." It was effectively the same thing as Act Under Fire's 10+ result of "you do it," which I've come to believe is the worst piece of moves design in all of Apocalypse World. Because it's a 10+ result where nothing new is gained. The 10 up results in Monsterhearts all give you benefits (with the exception of run away, I just realized).

The benefits of turn someone on and shut someone down are different types of leverage. The impact of that leverage is amorphous, which is raising alarm bells for you. Yeah? Thing is: amorphous social power isn't something to scoff at, especially when we're talking about teenagers. It's ammunition for the single scariest thing about teenagers: they can make someone's life a living hell, and they're willing to do it the moment the gains outweigh the losses.

Apocalypse World (and Dungeon World, and other hacks) present this same situation. These games don't have an initiative order, and so when two people want to take different actions, you have to ask yourself, "Who gets to act first?"

Shutting someone down is about hurting their feelings, insulting them, trying to get them to bow to you socially. It is fundamentally not about preventing them from doing something, but about shaming them. Sorry if there was confusion over that.

So, Abrielle is going to do a hex. Ping is trying to talk her out of it.

At this point, as the MC, you should ask Abrielle, "Are you even listening to Ping, or are you just chanting fervently in tongues?" If Abrielle isn't listening to Ping, then Ping's only recourse is in spending a String. This is a perfect time to ask, "So Ping, Abrielle doesn't even pause to listen to your pleas. How does this make you feel?"

But let's say Abrielle holds off for a moment, and Ping has her attention. Ping has a rock, and is threatening Abrielle. Don't reach for the moves! Reach for the provocative questions, and then build upon the answers. "Abrielle, do you think she'd actually throw the rock? Are you scared?" You aren't ready for a move yet.

If Ping wants to shame Abrielle, then reach for shutting someone down.
If Ping wants to use emotional leverage over Abrielle, tell her to spend a String.

If neither of those things happen, I don't think there's a move here. "Abrielle, do you continue with the hex?" If she does, then ask, "Ping, she's chanting again. Do you actually throw the rock?"

If both Abrielle and Ping continue with their course of action, then their rolls are both really obvious: Abrielle is rolling hex-casting, and Ping is rolling lashing out physically. It's up to you as an MC to determine who rolls first (and thus what happens first). And that's just about narrative sensibilities and how you imagine the situation in your head.

In Short: Ping threatening Abrielle doesn't trigger a roll. Or if it does (like shutting someone down), that roll won't tell you how Abrielle responds. That's Abrielle's player's job.

(Side-Note: If Abrielle were an NPC, Ping would be rolling to manipulate an NPC. Since Abrielle is a PC, she is fundamentally in control of her own responses. So roleplay it out until a move is triggered.)