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 - T.G.

Pages: [1] 2
Apocalypse World / Re: Zero barter holding options?
« on: September 24, 2015, 11:37:51 AM »
Cool thanks. I told the player they can certainly make the hold with all these choices, but it seems like they would be getting more headache than reward for their advancement.  They wanted to know why they could not just use the example from the text.  My searches before posting did not help, thanks for your assistance.

Apocalypse World / Zero barter holding options?
« on: September 23, 2015, 08:27:53 PM »
After some sessions of play, Marie gets a small holding and wealth.  Its population is tiny, they're eager recruiters, and they're decadent and perverse.  Surplus: 1-barter growth want: 261

Except starting from 1 barter anxiety base choosing tiny drops anxiety, choosing successful recruiters adds growth, choosing decadent and perverse drops -1 barter and adds savagery.  Surplus 0 barter growth want: savagery.  Am I missing the unwritten rule that makes the book example hold true?  Can barter not be dropped below one regardless of the options chosen?  I feel like this falls under a similar guideline of the Battlebabe's special weapon choices.  You could make a head-scratcher, but why would you.

Apocalypse World / Re: Someone Getting a Hold
« on: July 01, 2015, 11:11:53 AM »
As far as being a fan, that was most likely what got a non-hardholder in a position of control in the first place.  The wealth move is about barter and management of problems that arise in a controlled holding.  Without the wealth move I would imagine barter can still be extracted from the hold and problems can be handled, but the image of wealth management seems less fitting than that of cannibalizing resources.  Just because a player scores a vehicle, they do not instantly become a no shit driver.  A non-savvyhead trying to get lucky in a workspace is looking at the MC and asking what happens next for lack of a move to trigger.

Apocalypse World / Re: Artful and Gracious to stop brewing mob?
« on: March 01, 2015, 12:26:03 PM »
Further food for thought, the scene worked great and played out well with the characters involved, however in discussing interference to possibly limit the Skinner it bears pointing out that Artful & Gracious as written targets only NPC audience members.

Apocalypse World / Re: How to make a formidable opponent?
« on: December 26, 2014, 04:06:10 PM »
Players in my campaign, note: this is just purely something I was idly wondering about and has no bearing on anything going on in Merciful Bear don't be silly why would you even think that

So you are saying that reenactments of The Neverending Story style dragon rides are totally out of the question, no way, no how, whatsoever, end of discussion? 

Challenge accepted.

Apocalypse World / Re: Yet another combat move choice question
« on: November 11, 2014, 10:33:44 PM »
Well hello fellow players. 

I agree both the situation as set up and the possible outcomes resolved better with seize by force than it would have for go aggro.  Truth reading Barkers intentions established he was about to make a move to end the smart mouthery.  A partial success of go aggro makes the situation more confusing, why would Barker reconsider for anything less than a complete success?  The results for a seize by force roll allow for several of the outcomes that I think Truth was looking for.  Even with the partial success in this case Truth got results, just not all the results in the spectacular fashion a complete success would have brought to the situation.  I sure hope Barker doesn't have any hard feelings...

I am in the middle of seeing an Angel to Faceless transformation, largely because of Healing Touch.  Seems like a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde scenario unfolding that should be very entertaining.

Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook focus: The Brainer
« on: June 26, 2014, 03:17:58 PM »
It is rather telling how stereotypes of one playbook can lead to the entire world being against them regardless of how they are handled by the player.  Take a generalization of a Gunlugger, one man unstoppable death machine that solves most problems through violence.  Funny we do not see them ostracized in the way of the Brainer.  I guess people are more comfortable just being murdered outright than the thought of being weirdly manipulated?

Dungeon World / Re: Party Composition?
« on: June 24, 2014, 06:38:45 PM »
Does the typical dungeon world party need a good heavy-hitting class, or do you think he would be fine playing as a bard?

Good question.  The answer hinges on how a party of any composition chooses to overcome complications.  If a player wants to play a fighter, that is a pretty clear sign that someone is looking for a straight up fight.  Players choosing to roll a druid, wizard, or thief might be more interested in slightly different solutions. 

If you are assuming that the group is too scrawny, what does that say about your assumptions of the adventures they have yet to experience?  If you foresee straight up fights that would be problematic without a fighter, perhaps some revision is in order to allow for other skill-sets to shine.  Try to ensure there is always more than one way to solve a problem, even if the consequences of some solutions are more deterring than others.

If characters that might not be best suited to a straight up fight still decide to take it on the chin, wish them luck and play to see what happens.  You might be surprised at how they not only survive but thrive.

Apocalypse World / Re: Suggest me some "different" apocalypse :)
« on: June 23, 2014, 06:30:49 PM »
I have personally been intrigued by a "Life After People" type scenario inspired in part by the book Earth Abides.  After a few generations there is a general reset to a hunter gatherer state of nature.  It might make too many assumptions about scarcities of guns, ammo, technology and such to appeal to some groups though.

Apocalypse World / Re: Out of Place
« on: June 10, 2014, 02:22:55 PM »
An Angel catches an assault rifle thrown his way by an Operator after the two barely managed their way out of a bad situation.  It was a great part of a scene between the two where with no words, one tells the other this is bad, time to man up.  He bartered the rifle away to replenish stock for his angel kit.  Sometimes a character will do exactly what you would expect when cast as a fish out of water.  It might be cool to tease them with the idea of being a bad ass, but it does not mean they will take the bait.

Edit: more advice for OP

First and foremost remember playing a game is supposed to be fun.  You can put a great deal of work into it for sure, but focus on the fun.  If you think this might not be the game for your group there is only one way to find out for sure.  Give them the chance to find out, players mindsets can change from session to session.  Talking about the positives and negatives of trying new games and systems can help, even after the fact since you have already gotten things started.  Play up the positives and continue to work on the negatives.

PCs being dicks to each other is not a bad thing.  It can certainly make for some interesting scenes, especially when two would be foes are forced to work together however temporarily to face a larger threat.  I have seen great things spin out of two players trying to read or resist the other reading their character.  This is why I suggested getting the players invested in their characters motivations.  Being dicks to each other might not seem like a constructive motivation, but work with it or whatever else they give you.  If they are making moves and handling their side of the conversation, that makes for more fun for you. 

One thing I would recommend after seeing that your group is coming from a d&d quest type background would be to encourage them to be proactive.  The more they know about their characters wants and needs and pursue these personal ambitions, the easier it will get for you to go with the flow running the game.  It can also be an adjustment for players coming from a strong murder hobo tradition to begin talking their way out of problems instead of resorting to violence, so try to encourage them.  Hopefully not assuming too much about your group, just speaking from my own experiences.

Apocalypse World / Re: Handling a Hardholder PC
« on: June 03, 2014, 01:35:04 PM »
Do you know who does not like politics and intrigue?  The types of people who are no good at it.  The types that see subtlety as a waste of time when you could just go for the throat and take what you want.  Maybe you know some NPC's that share this world view.  I would imagine that all the politics, secrets and whispers smells like weakness to them.  Maybe one or two of the residents of the hold see those in positions of power doing little but lording their status over more capable replacements.

Dungeon World / Re: Bloody Aegis - how to deal with it?
« on: May 19, 2014, 05:24:30 PM »
My coming players are all coming from old school table top games and computer video games, just like I think many players coming to dungeon world are.

When I see calls for nerfing advancements I think the same thing of GMs in Dungeon World.  It might be more of a problem with the way a GM makes moves than one advancement being too powerful.  If all a Gm does is inflict damage, why would players be interested in moves that do anything other than damage mitigation.  Change the action.  Pull the rug out from under them, or the floor entirely.  Make their lives FULL of adventure.  For my part just getting into combat, dealing damage and taking damage, is not the most adventurous part of a ROLE playing game.

Pages: [1] 2