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 - Z in VA

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
i for one am very excited about this project!
hence the thread-necromancy :)

2
Apocalypse World / Re: Gunlugger = best playbook
« on: June 10, 2012, 01:45:27 AM »
In my experience, there's a die-by-the-sword tendency for Gunluggers.

In a game I ran over the winter, our Gunlugger, Rue, progressed steadily for a while. I think it was when Rue got attacked on foot by a dozen bikers and won that he finally lost all caution about using violence.
A siege, one melee, and two shoot-outs later, Rue finally pissed off the tenant farmers badly enough that about fifty of them picked up rocks and pelted Rue until he collapsed. He had 2-armor, but a miss on a 0-harm roll is still bad, and when he hit the ground, someone took his gun away and shot him.
I think it's no accident that Rue's home was inside a drainage pipe (which was chosen by Rue himself) - social interactions are dangerous, but too many interactions that end in violence is pretty bad too, so it's better if the Gunlugger can get away from it all once in a while before s/he ends up burning down the town.

3
roleplaying theory, hardcore / Re: breaking old habits
« on: May 29, 2012, 03:35:24 PM »
it might also help to remember that you, as MC, are not there to challenge people or anything. like it says in the rulebook, if you wanted to you could just have a cave-in cause them all 10-harm, and that'd be that.

i try to MC like i'm just there to remind the PCs of what they can already see - the dice and i tell the players what happens when they move around and do stuff in the world, but i don't owe the players a plot or a story or anything.

there's something in the Threats and Fronts rules about not having actual monsters - that is, even Grotesques are fundamentally people, and i worry that giving people magic, at-will powers is only going to make them feel like not-people.
giving them ritual powers, or anything that requires time and a little peace and quiet to accomplish, is no problem at all, i've found. powers that require multiple NPCs' involvement to activate are also good, as they make them collectively scary or fearsome without making them too un-people-y as individuals.

4
Sagas of the Icelanders / Re: [old, ignore this] Yeah?
« on: May 20, 2012, 01:04:45 AM »
Just played a pretty recent version with Jason Morningstar and some other folks at Camp Nerdly.
Physical challenges were understood to be most any dangerous, possibly competitive, activity, be it a footrace, a swimming contest, or a holmgang-duel. In our one-shot session last night, the physical challenges were all combat.

But the choices under accept a physical challenge are all pretty vague, which is awesome:
- better/faster/stronger when it counts
- you don't tempt fate
- your feat is admirable; somebody notices
- your feat is memorable; take +1 forward against them

This is an incredibly flexible move. I had been under the impression that "physical challenge" meant combat, 1:1, but this move here could be suitable for a lot of different activities, kind of like contests in Agon. The point is that someone comes out on top, and there's a larger social context to your actions. That's pretty cool.

Anyway, I go on too much. It was a solid session, and I'm impressed.

5
Dungeon World / Re: Is "say yes or roll the dice" part of DW?
« on: March 13, 2012, 05:33:09 PM »
Whoops! Meant to add:

Sage, when the rule is "say yes, or roll the dice", it kind of implies that the GM is the focus of the decision-making process. Conversely, when the rule is "to do it, do it", it makes the role of the fiction sufficiently explicit.
Say Yes was a push in that direction, for its time - it was saying "Hey GM, don't just make 'em roll for no reason! WHY are they rolling?" It's imploring you to consider the fictional situation, or at least be prepared to justify your gut feeling in terms of what's happening right now or what has already been established.

It's a classic principle of play - - sometimes, dice rolling isn't the right move. Dogs changes things by making its play principles super explicit, and that's the deeper value of Dogs - - it led fairly directly (if slowly, over years) into AW territory, where play principles are super-explicit so you can spend more time inside some fruitful creative constraints and benefit from them, and spend less time "out in the cold" and totally freeform.

(incidentally, in the sordid world of RPG identity politics, it was always weird being the guy who disliked both freeform and super-crunchy play styles.. AW is a nice middle-of-the-road approach for me.)

Sage, overall, it sounds like what you're saying is "Don't think about it so hard. Let the Moves do the work for you - that's why they're there!" And I completely agree.

6
Dungeon World / Re: Is "say yes or roll the dice" part of DW?
« on: March 13, 2012, 05:20:29 PM »
Yes! I was wondering what happened to "turn their move back on them". I've been doing it regardless; it's one of the real highlights of AW (no pun intended) and it's really helped me engage the players (while taking the pressure off myself! ^__^)

Re: "put them in a spot" - I also need to watch out for the equivalent of taking 10 or taking 20 - - when a player describes being really meticulous, obviously that's gonna cost them more time - it just follows in the fiction, ya know?

7
Dungeon World / Re: Is "say yes or roll the dice" part of DW?
« on: March 13, 2012, 04:45:55 PM »
I guess you could say that DW (and AW) use "say yes" but it's so far baked into the game that the GM shouldn't be thinking about it. If a move comes up that means there's something at stake.

Take Perilous Journey for example. We could have said "here's the system for journeys, use it when there's something at stake on a journey." That's say yes or roll the dice. Instead we have a trigger "When you undertake a perilous journey..." This way instead of the GM thinking about "should I just say yes? Is this a conflict?" the GM looks to the fiction established: "is this journey perilous?"

...The hard work of figuring out when to say yes is already baked into the game.

Well said! The conditions for the Move must be clearly met for the Move to work well and not require double-checking, as you said. If I attack an opponent in melee, then by god I am Hacking and Slashing! Volley is equally concrete, and Defend is pretty clear.
Defy Danger is broad ("act despite an imminent threat, or suffer a calamity"), but the different options for each stat give us much narrower fictional cues. It's more interesting than its direct ancestor, Act Under Fire (the most-used move in my AW games, omg), and it reinforces niche protection. It's really colorful and rad!

The problem I run into is that I can't picture what Spouting Lore is really doing. Is your character standing there talking aloud? - - that's how I interpret it when someone Aids another on a Spout Lore check: they have a conversation.
But whaddya do if you roll a 6 or less when you Spout Lore, or Discern Realities? You have to make up your own answer, more or less, and this is also how I felt about Open Your Brain from AW.

It's like Say Yes is baked like apples into pie when it comes to most Moves, but the information-related moves (in AW and DW, that is) feel a bit more raw and uncooked - they stand out from the rest of the "pie" of play that much more in that they require longer pauses while the GM thinks up a reasonable answer.

8
Dungeon World / Re: fictional positioning
« on: March 11, 2012, 04:15:32 PM »
I think Defend needs to have Con connected to it. It's about heart - about courage and steadfastness. But even just looking at it mechanically, Defend still works for a ranged attacker: you can choose whichever option you want, so you'll pick one that makes fictional sense in that moment.

As for the zombie example, I would just design a "zombie horde" that had low armor but high HP, so it'd take a while to get through them all but everyone could make some progress against them. If the players tried to bullrush through, I'd say that's Defying Danger+strength, yeah.

9
Dungeon World / Re: fictional positioning
« on: March 11, 2012, 03:17:17 AM »
Could you give a concrete example of such a thing, neither attacking nor defending? To actually answer your question, I think the Moves work in such a manner that combat isn't quiiite a separate part of the rules from things like Parley or Discern Realities - - since non-fighty tasks are more clearly backed up with mechanics, they remain more viable options than Intimidate or Diplomacy might be in a fight in 3e.

As far as combat stunts and so forth, I figure that yes, Defy Danger will get a lot of use. But individual class moves should be entering play a lot: Bend Bars/Lift Gates encourages fighters to smash terrain and obstacles (even during combat), and of course casters have their spells. Still, in terms of just being clever with their surroundings, in true D&D problem-solving fashion, I figure Defy Danger is going to b your go-to. Think of it as the "ability check" Move, if it helps.

As for GM-whim, the game works better if you use only use Moves when a risk of failure would be interesting. Yep, that's the GM's call, big time, but I find myself frequently letting people do harm as indicated (or whatever) because there's no "seed of uncertainty" that could make things go awry. Use a Move when you need the dice to help you figure out what happens next.

10
Dungeon World / Re: Make Camp
« on: March 10, 2012, 11:09:30 PM »
^^ I like that it clearly makes sense for the heroes to kind of hole up individually, wherever they can find a bit of cover.
I like that a weak hit means a future encounter, but you still get to heal up. It preserves the "integrity" of getting a hit.

11
Dungeon World / Re: [cleric] revoking spells
« on: March 09, 2012, 11:46:00 PM »
Dang, what did she choose?

12
Dungeon World / Re: [cleric] revoking spells
« on: March 09, 2012, 10:59:21 PM »
Yeah, I totally misinterpreted that. Ha!

I suppose you could establish a local "tolerance" for the DM revoking a spell on a 6 or less. It could potentially feel like a usurpation of the player's authority (since it's by default something a player can choose to do) but because that 7-9 option puts it "out there" as a possibility, it could be something the DM could do as a hard move.

13
Dungeon World / Re: Make Camp
« on: March 09, 2012, 10:51:47 PM »
Good call! Hobbitses need to hide from prying eyes, after all.

14
Dungeon World / Re: Make Camp
« on: March 09, 2012, 10:42:09 PM »
In my opinion, the more characters you have means that you can go into more dangerous areas and, because of your numbers, be able to synergize to keep up your HP and so forth.

That just kind of fits the fiction to me - - people can sleep more soundly and digest properly and all those other comfort-things when someone else is around to watch their back. It fits with my digestion of adventure stories and how characters in that genre keep it together.

In a spy-film or heist-flick hack for DW, Make Camp would be something like:
Pit Stop:
When the lot of you go out for a drink or a bite to eat, consume one Smoke [thanks, Regiment!] to recover HP equal to half your max. If you turn down a cig or don't have one, you ain't feelin' too good - heal nothing and take -1forward.
Roll +eyeballs - - on a hit you may choose one for the "party" as a whole:
- you're not in enemy territory
- the food is actually pretty good; you don't have to dull your taste buds with a smoke first to stomach it.
- no one seems to remember you after you leave, if anyone should come inquiring about you.

My point is that adventure fiction is very often about the characters eating, drinking, or otherwise engaging in (literally) sensual activity together - playing music or partying, even.
Mechanically, socializing as a group is emphasized, and playing with fewer players is discouraged because it kind of collapses the whole Bond system, which if used can do a lot of the creative groundwork for the party dynamic, and even the world the game takes place in.

Then, when you get back to town, you can mark your return with a Carouse roll.

Jeremy, I figure if I didn't want to really screw the players over on account of that 3 you mentioned, you could just opt to make a softer move instead, like revealing something bad about a hireling or announcing future badness (maybe the first distant rumblings of the Balrog, deep below?) to show the players that even at rest they can't really relax here.

It revolves around the phrase "dangerous territory" - - just like in good old Unknown Armies, if there's no threat or challenge in the way, then don't put one there. Make Camp seems to be "say yes or roll the dice" personified, as the players look to the DM to judge whether they're in a dangerous spot or if they can just have a reprieve for a bit.

15
Dungeon World / [cleric] revoking spells
« on: March 09, 2012, 09:32:25 PM »
Has anyone experimented with revoking spells?
I imagine the default option would be to revoke each spell after it's been cast once, to remain in "balance" with the wizard, but since it's such a subjective call for the DM to make, it seems ripe for interpretation.

In particular, I was thinking about using it to "signal" the cleric player about their god's desires or intentions, but you could instead interpret the "boons" granted by the cleric's deity for abiding by the Precepts of your Religion as the signal to give the player back a spell of some level.

Whoa, actually, you could have a pretty heavy-handed god acting kind of like a Shadow from Wraith, putting weapons in the character's hands when she needs healing spells, for instance.

You could dial in very close to the cleric's "arc" for a bit by carefully interpreting boons and revocation, just like the wizard-class can be put in the spotlight with use of the move Ritual. Their magic is what makes them special, so the game puts in these "interpretive" little tidbits to liven things up when the mood strikes.

Pages: [1] 2 3