Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Gerald C

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: December 15, 2011, 11:24:36 AM »
Hi, David. I just looked through the harm and healing section of the playbook again, and I'm not really sure where your confusion is coming from. If you could quote something specific that is throwing you I would appreciate it, so I can make it more clear. Having said that, to answer your question, no, kids only die in place of a debility, not from simply taking harm. So, with other playbooks, you would normally take a debility when you go past 12, and it prevents you from dying. In the case of this book, when you go past 12 one of your kids dies, and since your kids each provide the playbook as a whole with a mechanical benefit in the form of a stat bump, this provides the same function as a debility to other characters.

I hope this helps. Please feel free to ask if you have more questions.

2
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: October 02, 2011, 02:01:26 PM »
@ Noofy: That's great! Thanks for the kind words, and I hope to hear some feedback from your game.

@ Reax: The more you talk, the more I feel like I've created a beautiful monster. /single tear of paternal pride

3
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: October 01, 2011, 12:00:42 PM »
I'm *very* excited about this, Reax. I would love if you could keep me updated via this thread.

Quote
The only 'problem' have been that the player player haven’t really been into any 'internal' interactions between the children (without me pushing him with questions) and at first had a hard time running them as a individuals and not just as a gang, but recently they have really started to get their own personalities.

I'm not sure this is so much a problem. I feel like this playbook has the potential to become disruptive if the player starts meta-gaming with himself, so the fact that your player is not doing that is a good thing. As far as personalities taking a while to develop, I find that's generally true of all characters, and not unique to this playbook.

4
Apocalypse World / Re: When you reset Hx, learn a secret [custom move]
« on: August 22, 2011, 07:43:31 PM »
#3 is an excellent addition to Hx rollover, with or without the rest of this move. I plan to use it from now on. Nice one!

5
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: August 13, 2011, 11:08:45 AM »
This actually reminds me of a thing I've been meaning to articulate. It's this: If any of your members are not explicitly somewhere else at the moment, they can be wherever you want them to be. Obvious modifications to this are Like a plague of locusts or when it makes absolutely no sense for it to be possible. But I can probably think of a plausible explanation for just about any scenario in order to have some other member show up.

What's the reason for this? Your character is the gang. This playbook doesn't function like any of the other playbooks. Your gang is not an extension of your character. In this case, your individual members are simply a logical extension of your gang.

Anyway I had some people asking about this, so there it is.

6
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: August 13, 2011, 11:00:15 AM »
As MC, there's nothing that I have to remember all the time, except the principles. If players forget to mark their experience from rolling highlighted stats, that's their problem. If the rat-pack player forgets to tell me about Abandon Ship, that's his problem. I'm not trying to penalize anyone, but I'm also not going to memorize everyone's character. That's the player's job.

I grant you the move is similar to Fuck this shit, but it does differ in a few fundamental ways, which were intentional. If you look at each die roll outcome, and the trigger for when each move can be used, they both have benefits and drawbacks over the other. Also remember that the rat-pack doesn't have access to Fuck this shit.

In response to your other question, this move can be used as an individual or for the entire gang. The rat-pack is unique in that whenever someone says 'it', 'they', or whatever, they are equally referring to both individuals and the pack as a whole.

7
Apocalypse World / Re: Problem: gunlugger that's not a gunlugger
« on: August 12, 2011, 10:57:43 AM »
The guillotine is interesting. I mean, yes, it does s-harm, but both Bloodcrazed and Merciless read, "When you do harm, inflict +1-harm." or some such. S-harm is harm so, inflict +1-harm. I picture this as someone trying to be all sneaky and take an enemy prisoner but, they're such a fucking psycho that they end up almost killing the guy in the attempt. It's important to note that moves almost never say "You may inflict +1-harm" or any such wiffle-waffle. Krippler, you hit this on the head, they are never 'off'. No. You are a merciless, bloodcrazed (probably psychotic) killing machine.

@Vx: I don't see the distinction you're drawing here. To me, moves are techniques. They're things you're good at or know how to do. Take, as an example parallel to our current discussion, a move I made for The Shifted, which I posted here on the forums.

Fibrillation NB: This move has changed in playtesting from what I originally posted.
Your hands become (1-harm or s-harm hand ap implanted)


It's a move, but it's implanted and it functions almost like crap. No problem. Why call them something else? 'Move' works just fine as it is.

8
Apocalypse World / Re: Problem: gunlugger that's not a gunlugger
« on: August 11, 2011, 09:28:14 PM »
Yes I had forgotten about Bloodcrazed, and it does what I meant. You were asking about the guillotine doing more harm by default which, with this move, it does.

I don't have the guillotine rules in front of me, but are you talking about implanted items? Either way, this is wrong:

Quote
but doesn't tell me exactly where.

In my opinion, there's no 'exactly' anything in Apocalypse World.

Now, and I could be wrong with this, but I feel like you're operating from a place that's common to some (many) other games. Instead of asking very specific questions like this and trying to shoehorn our answers into your preconceived idea of what games (are, should be, have been), I think a shift in perspective might benefit you more. I really don't mean for this to sound antagonistic, by the way. It's just my perception, and it's meant as constructive criticism.

You really hit on what I'm getting at by altering the Gunlugger to the Muscle. Do away with what you don't want and trade it for stuff you do. Maybe the Gunlugger doesn't exist in your AW. That's cool. Maybe the Muscle doesn't exist in my AW. That's cool too. Maybe in your AW you're so fucking tough you can strangle a man with your bare hands. Hot. In my AW moves are moves and crap is crap. One I can take away and one I can't. Maybe in your AW that's not true. I wonder what a Hardholder without Leadership would look like? Does a Hocus who loses faith in himself and God lose Divine Protection?

All I'm saying is that asking questions is good, but your answers are already right, whatever they happen to be. This system is designed to be hacked. Rip it apart and rebuild that shit. Everything is already broken anyway, it's not like you can make it worse.

9
Apocalypse World / Re: Problem: gunlugger that's not a gunlugger
« on: August 11, 2011, 08:49:46 PM »
Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, why not take Merciless from the Battlebabe as an advancement?

Also, I wouldn't call anyone's armour 'embedded'. It's an integral choice, but there's no reason it can't be taken off, damaged beyond repair, or lost. Just because you get if for free from day one doesn't mean you should get attached to it. As an MC I love to take people's (non-embedded) shit away from them.

As a contrast, take a look at the Faceless' mask. It may or may not count as armour, but having or not having your mask is an integral part of that character. The Gunlugger (or The Muscle) having or not having armour at any given moment means nothing, in terms of who the character is.

10
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: August 11, 2011, 08:36:55 PM »
Updated version of the PDF by Reax, now with art by Nathan Orlando Wilson. Thanks so much for your work on this you guys!

The Rat-pack Playbook PDF v.2

11
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: August 10, 2011, 10:12:55 PM »
Big thanks to Reax for putting this together! To anyone who uses it, I would love to hear your playtest results!

The Rat-pack Playbook PDF

12
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: August 09, 2011, 01:43:56 PM »
Oh! That's great Reax! And I agree, it does present some interesting roleplaying challenges, but I feel it ties in with Vx's ideas about gangs and playing multiple characters.

What I really want to know is if the ability to be in multiple places at once is game breaking. When you play two separate characters they can work in coordination, but they can also be at odds with one another. This playbook presents a ton a mechanical advantage to cooperation, but any antagonism between the kids is purely a fictional construct (as per +divided leadership). What I hope is that people will take this with AW's story first design in mind, and not use it as an attempt to overwhelm situations or other players.

13
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Rat-Pack
« on: August 09, 2011, 11:20:20 AM »
Thanks! I have a few others in playtesting right now, but I haven't been able to convince anyone to play this one. Once they've all been smoothed out I plan to release a custom playbook pdf, maybe with one or two others I have semi-planned. So, stay on the lookout for that! Also, if you (or anyone!) does play this, I would love to hear some feedback on it.

14
Apocalypse World / Re: When you reset Hx, learn a secret [custom move]
« on: August 03, 2011, 09:04:35 PM »
This is cool! But, to clarify: Is it your intention that this function identically when you reset from -4 to -1 as well?

15
Apocalypse World / Re: holdless scenarios?
« on: August 01, 2011, 06:06:42 PM »
The distinction here for me is responsibility. The Hardholder has responsibility to all the people in his hold, and is in turn rewarded for his efforts. This is all reflected in the wealth roll. The Maestro D', on the other hand, has absolutely no responsibility whatsoever to her patrons, and so gets nothing (explicitly, in the moves text) from them. It may be that one of your regulars brings you that thing for Fingers in every pie, but it's not explicit. Your patrons are not a part of your character. Your holding is.

Pages: [1] 2 3