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 - Munin

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27
Monster of the Week / Re: Mundane's Oops ability?
« on: March 27, 2020, 11:53:13 AM »
No worries!

Have you read Apocalypse World? If not, I highly recommend it, as it explains a lot of core concepts that many of the follow-on hacks sort of take for granted.

Monster of the Week / Re: Mundane's Oops ability?
« on: March 26, 2020, 11:01:57 AM »
In general, PbtA games aren't really "I do it again" kinds of games, so using the same move over and over isn't really the intent. For instance, take the basic move "Investigate a Mystery" as an example: the explicit trigger is "when you investigate a mystery..." You make your roll and get clues, and that mechanism represent you examining the clues before you to the best of your ability. But that's it, you've investigated the mystery. You've exhausted all of the leads and followed every available line of inquiry. You don't get to just roll again because the conditions that trigger the move aren't met. You'll note that there's no move for "when you reinvestigate a mystery..." You've learned everything you're going to learn - until you're presented with a new mystery, that is!

This is how the Keeper controls the pace of the story, how the underlying mystery gets revealed little by little as the PCs get more information. Otherwise, if you could just keep rolling and re-rolling the move, you'd quickly exhaust all of the clue options and know exactly what you're dealing with. But that's not how MotW works, because it's driven by the narrative rather than the dice.

This will feel weird to people used to traditional RPGs where you keep making "search" rolls until you find the secret door. PbtA games are explicitly not that. So yeah, take a good hard look at the trigger for "Oops!" and make absolutely sure it's applicable before having the player roll anything.

brainstorming & development / Re: Making a new game?
« on: March 19, 2020, 01:01:06 PM »
Congrats! Have you play-tested it outside your group yet? That's a really good way to figure out where your unspoken (unwritten) assumptions about the mechanics are hiding.

We actually broke the rules and set ours in gaslight London (though the PCs still represented marginalized populations). I went the extra mile to make the Fey utterly alien in their outlook, which was both hilarious and terrifying. Making deals with a demon was a central part of the story arc, as was the recovery of a particular book from a group of hermetic arcanists. The Ghost PC in particular was initially like skeptical until it came out that the book perhaps held the secret of re-incorporation (i.e. "unghosting"), and suddenly she was like, "Find. The. Book."

It was a ton of fun, but I think we applied the "roll for new debts at the beginning of every session" move too much, and as a result the game eventually groaned under the weight of all of the obligations everyone was tracking. Were I to run it again, I'd cut way back on that.

Apocalypse World / Yay! I'm stoked this forum is back!
« on: March 05, 2020, 02:40:49 PM »
Glad things are back up and running here!

Oh, yeah, OK. If you're prepared for everything to erupt into chaos and crash in flames, then I think you're in good shape.   ;D

While AW is certainly flexible enough to do what you want to do, it's worth noting that the themes of scarcity, isolation, and lawlessness are fairly "baked-in" to how the mechanical and narrative effects of AW work.

For example, many playbook-specific moves and even a number of the basic moves enable (and even encourage!) sudden, terrible, wanton violence. True, that violence should always have consequences, but in the "civilized" setting you're describing, it's harder to fit in the Chopper as a roving bandit or the Gunlugger as a gives-no-fucks death-machine. What happens when the Battlebabe takes a vicious dislike to a particular Overholder? If you're looking at said Overholder through cross-hairs (and you should) I think we both know the answer to that question. Thus, the actions of AW PCs can be massively destabilizing (especially if they are playing to their strengths and working together) to a world's "status quo," which I think is a big part of the reason that Vincent contends that Apocalypse World shouldn't have any status quos.

I'm not saying it can't be done (it can), just that you're going to need to contextualize the PCs' actions in a different way and that you should be prepared for a little bit of tonal dissonance.

Apocalypse World / Re: Child-thing Mother's Heartbeat question
« on: May 09, 2019, 01:31:19 PM »

Monster of the Week / Re: Newbie Questions -- Newbie Keeper
« on: April 01, 2019, 11:27:50 AM »
No worries. Let us know how it goes!

Monster of the Week / Re: Newbie Questions -- Newbie Keeper
« on: February 26, 2019, 06:05:21 PM »
1) Yup, you got it.

2) In general, these sorts of things are handled narratively. If the amount of time it takes the hunter to break down the door is important (e.g. the monster is on the other side of the locked door attacking someone and the hunter is trying to bust in and save the victim), the I'd generally treat that as acting under pressure. The results will dictate what happens next (10+, you break through the door in time to save the victim and confront the monster, 7-9 you get a worse outcome - maybe you save the victim but the monster gets away, and on a miss, well, by the time you get through the door the monster is slain the victim and made a clean getaway.

But apart from a situation where something important hangs in the balance, if a hunter wants to bash down a door or destroy an object, consider that door bashed or that object destroyed and move on.

3) I'll let someone with more familiarity with MotW's magic system tackle this one. But as a fan of the characters, my usual approach is: "sure, why not?"

4) Generally this sort of thing is handled like gangs in Apocalypse World. You aggregate a number of creatures together for the sake of handling things in fewer dice rolls. Groups of enemies can be extremely dangerous because they generally inflict more harm collectively and suffer less (which is where weapons with the "area" tag become super useful).

5) Not really, no. Change is inevitable.

6) PbtA games don't really work that way. "Rounds" aren't really a thing. How long it takes to accomplish something is based purely on the ongoing fictional narrative. So the Mongolian Death Worm is going to kill you "soon" - can you make it to the crusty old hunter-turned-surgeon in town to get it pulled out of your body before it kills you? That sounds like acting under pressure to me. See how this works?

7) Not I, but others may.

As an aside, if you haven't already it's probably worth checking out Apocalypse World (the base game upon which MotW is based). It has tons of insights into how PbtA games are supposed to work.

Apocalypse World / Re: LE Playbooks in 2nd Ed
« on: January 28, 2019, 07:17:13 PM »
Awesome! From an MC perspective, the Hoarder is one of my favorite 1E playbooks, hope your group has fun with it as well!

Apocalypse World / Re: LE Playbooks in 2nd Ed
« on: January 22, 2019, 03:36:41 PM »
The fundamental difference in Hx between 1st Ed and 2nd Ed is that in 1st Ed you used to be able to straight up say stuff about other peoples' characters and make it true (like, "You left me bleeding and did nothing for me" or hilariously, "you are my lover"). Now you ask for people to step up to those roles. 2nd Ed also eliminates the step where you tell other people what your Hx with them is (and they use their options to change that), which means you are doing Hx in a single pass. In many cases, the switch is simply taking the options you had before and keeping them (though asking for volunteers now instead of just naming someone) and coming up with an Hx number that works for "everyone else."

Because of how the Hoarder's Hx is structured, you can't make as direct a port with this approach. But the key point about the Hoarder is, well, the hoard! Hx should be about that. As such, I might suggest something like the following:

Go around again for Hx. On your turn, ask either or both:
• Which one of you have I stolen something from to feed my hoard?
For that character, write Hx+1
• Which one of you once took something from my hoard and never gave it back?
For that character, write Hx+3
For everyone else, write Hx-1. Other peoples' motivations are less immediately materialistic, and this confuses you.

That gets across the essential weirdness of the Hoarder's (generally larcenous) relations with others. It also gives you as the MC the ability to ask all sorts of provocative questions about the circumstances of the above answers during character creation.

Apocalypse World / Re: Some questions on handling Savvyhead's Workspace
« on: September 21, 2018, 01:34:12 PM »
I think the best thing to nail down with it's going to take several/dozen/hundreds of tries is "what's the downside of trying again?" At its most basic, this could be viewed as already being a combination of expensive and time consuming, but this option is better use when even making an attempt has some weighty (and irrevocable) consequence. Like, sure, the Savvyhead can construct a fully functional cyber-arm, but actually getting it properly hooked up requires, well... "experimentation." And it turns out that if it doesn't work, it fries the attached nerves, and thus really can't be attempted again on the same subject. See where this is going?

Ebok, while I generally agree with the rest of your assessment, it's worth noting that the violation glove counts as both time and intimacy for the purposes of Brainer moves.

Yeah, that's generally my interpretation. "Hide this device in Rolfball's tank" or "At the end of your shift, turn off the shield-generator." That kind of thing. The coercive power of go agro is generally limited to being in someone's presence because its very trigger is predicated on doing immediate, one-sided violence to them. In-brain puppet strings has a much less immediate, much longer-term coercive effect.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27