Woop Vincent didn't answer for a week so I'm going to tell you my dumb thoughts and maybe we could muddle through it together.

-Looking at ask for judgement it feels like sometimes the 7-9 is the preferable outcome.

I think this is working as intended. Rolls aren't ALWAYS better the higher a value is. If you're politically well connected, you will get more results asking justice from a people with less order/formality than with high order/formality. Asking for justice from a people with no order/formality is asking for trouble though.

-Can you deny a mechanical right? Like preventing a person with the right to Confront Their Betters For Justice from rolling strong instead of good to win them over?

The way I've been playing it is that all rights create triggers for the denied your right move when something stops them from doing the fictional thing (So say you ask to talk to your betters for some justice, and the guard who hates you tells you they're busy, he's denying your right to Confront Your Betters), but I don't think it makes sense to negate someone's mechanical benefits willy nilly. Maybe it'd make sense if someone had a  Right that was like 'You have the Right to make people roll Weird to win you over instead of good (this trumps substituition)' then they'd be denying your right like that.

* The Court Wizard's consult with the gods of their people, seems like a not very useful Right, only desirable in the case that you raise Bold above Weird, which would take 2 advancements at least.

* Seeking initiation - Is that unavailable due to Mantles not really existing yet?

* The Peasant Beauty's guaranteed 12 moves seem oddly powerful. Guaranteed 12 seems better than any other combat Right that applies to individual combat.

* If you get the better position from someone and have your weapon at their throat, can you just kill them outright or would you be inflicting Harm of some kind?

* Let's say two people want to jump another person. I'm assuming thats essentially Single Combat, with a clear possibility of aid, as opposed to a battle. So whoever's in front makes the Strong role, they get a 7-9. I'm assuming they can ask for their friends help in the fight to bump it up to a 10+. Do they get help before or after spending?

* What if someone, when denied their right decides that they actually shouldn't have that right in the first place - Can they go off script from the Denied Your Right options? Can they choose to just lose that Right?

* Good is like pleasant and/or righteous, but not necessarily either, right?

* What do players do when they go off to heal for a season? Pick up a new character in the interim? Wait for the season to pass?

Not Vincent, but I could help on a couple of these:

Maestro 'D: A combination of the terms Maestro (A master musician) and Maitre 'D (A head waiter at a restaurant)

Gunlugger: A person who lugs (Carries) guns.

Skinner: I believe this is mostly derived from using the word "Skin" to describe alluring sexuality or revealing physical appearance, similar to the phrases "Skin flick" (porn) or "skin trade" (prostituition)

That all sounds pretty groovy to me.

Oh gosh I don't actually have any other questions

Oh okay here's one: Was there reason why Apocalypse World was the game that has that queer-inclusive stuff written in in a powerful way? Some sort of timing issue or coinciding with what you wanted to accomplish in AW?

I'm thinking of it in comparison to DitV. I really appreciated the handling of queer issues in DitV because it was like "These judeo-christian-ish religious people think what you are doing right now is wrong." But I don't think of it as an approach that would have the same sort of wide-appeal.

I like the idea of a Jekyll/Hyde skin.

I think the playbook is a little too "Hulk", making it be a little like Hulk is cool, but I want my Hyde to be more of a immoral lustfull sociopath and less of a berserker, which is truer to the source material / more interesting in Mosterhearts / less of the Werewolf all over again. In that regard I would rewrite the darkest self and maybe tweak a move or two.

More questions!

1) The Officers' Logistics: So it sounds like its similar to Wealth / Fortunes... sooo... what's surplus? 3ish gear? a Unit Supply? What's troubles? No toilet paper? The only food left is completely tasteless? Half the squad's sick?

2) Would you suggest using "gangs" against PCs, like in AW? If there's an abstract group of 15ish dudes that throw javelins agaisnst a squad containing two pcs standing together, is that a javelin attack rolled against each PC, with the VOF increased by 1 because its a bigger group? Do gangs take damage like a normal Enemy, 3 hits and they're out? Do they have damage reduction like gangs in AW?

3) End of session checklist... Is this "Do the Hxy thing from AW but for Bond, and also give them XP for stuff. Figure it out yourself." or is their an end of session checklist I'm missing?

4) I find the PCs interested in socially dealing with neutral NPC parties... allying with them, intimidating them... is that something that is intentionally not very rules-addressed? I kinda want the partisan move from 1.0... was that move removed because it was sucky in play, or because it just never came up?

5) How much Gear do people start off with? How much unit Supply? Does it default to "Not enough"?

I'm running my first session of The Regiment tomorrow. I'm using kind of a funky setting: Time travelers taking over ancient rome with modern weaponry.

A couple of rules questions:

* Is it intended that grit be a permanent attribute and tough be expended per use?

* Awww, no moves from other playbooks unless you're the Commando? But they're so neat.

* I'm trying to stat up swords and javelins and junk. I want to make the inferiority of ancient weapons kind of a big deal (It is about a bunch of dudes with machineguns taking over rome), but it doesn't make sense to me for swords to be less effective than combat knives, so, I'm thinking swords are 2d tight quick, javelins are 1d close expend. Unless it breaks the system to have 1d weapons.

I would say you want to roll Seduce/Manipulation when a request is made emotionally appealing.

Example: If the Gunlugger offers the Chopper some Barter to do the job right now, that's not even Manipulation, that's giving someone Barter with strings attached, which is almost always better (Automatic 10+) Because even socially stunted weirdos can make people's eye waters with a sack of dough (Actual sack, actual dough)

If he doesn't offer the barter like that (If I was playing, I would be all "OFFER THE BARTER! OFFER THE BARTER!") MAYBE any part of the negotiation is Manipulation, MAYBE any part of it isn't. If someone is like "Hey would you like a job at my compound" That isn't manipulation. If someone is like "Hey do you want to be a ROCKSTAR overlord at my LAST BASTION OF CIVILIZATION that is filled with DELIGHTFUL MALE ESCORTS. We have a CHOCOLATE FOUNTAIN" than that is manipulation.

You should also consider prompting people to make Sharp roll to Read a Person and figure out How To Get Them To Do What You Want.

But at the same time, the Moves can't cover all situations where you think people are dragging a scene's length. Sometimes people are just doing things that aren't Moves for a long time (Like *Possibly* in this case). In that case, you've got to cut scenes around to make sure everyone gets adequate time and the interesting parts are moved to (But be respectful, and keep in mind that this could be the interesting parts for that player.)