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.


Topics - Tavis

Pages: [1]
1
Dungeon World / Sage's AW-style principles for non-Apocalypse D&D
« on: November 23, 2010, 10:34:20 AM »
Why was I not informed about this awesomeness?

The tragedy is, it would have been such an easy thing to do. Someone could have simply sat me down and said to me in a calm, clear voice,  "Tavis, Sage can whip nunchucks around like a hundred times per second.".

Or posted about it here!

2
Last session of my OD&D campaign, the PC Ookla the Mok needed to be raised from the dead, leading to us doing a round of at-the-table individual actions/carousing for each of the two weeks in which he recuperated. I continue to find that the AW moves serve me best when we're in town, where time-scales, spatial relationships, and dangers are all relatively fluid and abstract. In the confines of the dungeon later this session, where the party tends to cohere as a unit and my resources for making trouble for them are more exactly specified, I found myself reaching for our usual OD&D ways of resolving things. (See exception below).

I find that I'm happy making up moves on the fly. I didn't give players the Dungeon World move sheet, and when I referred to it myself usually none of the moves was just right so I created my own to suit the occasion. I think that moves are important in AW, and less so for me, because:

- the structure of the AW moves tell you what the game is about; you're going to want to be concerned with whether people trust you, you're going to come under fire and seize things by force, etc. Adding moves to our existing game means we already have a feel for what it's about.

- the transparency of the AW moves assure players that this is a game with rules and that they can have some control over how they get screwed by a bad roll. Our OD&D resolution system runs on our established trust that, as a fan of the PCs, I want to see them get screwed in ways we'll all enjoy playing out. It also creates an expectation that some of the surprise for the players will come from my keeping some rules & game elements on my side of the screen; the moves work well with our expectation that the surprise for me will come from how the dice and player actions interact.

Here are some of the moves I remember from this in-town phase:

The fighting men Ookla and John Fighter devoted a week to re-asserting their bond with their intelligent swords and trying to explore the weapons' power. The OD&D rules for this aren't sufficiently dynamic to suit me, but I wanted to use them as a baseline. In OD&D your ability to master your sword's ego depends on your Strength and Intelligence. I didn't want to use dual bonuses, so I asked the players whether they wanted to prepare for this trial through mental or physical exercise. The OD&D rules also say that swords are materialistic (like special interests/carousing, this is another example of an Arnesonian treasure sink), so I also let them get a bonus to the roll based on what they spent.

Ookla the Mok's player rolled in the 7-9 zone, so as he asserted his will over his sword Thirster I gave him a choice of:

- what powers does Thirster have that I don't know about?
- what is Thirster's immediate goal?
- what is Thirster trying to hide from you?

He chose goal, so I told him it was to leave Ookla for a more powerful wielder, Captain Rakotis, who the Church of the Killing Frost was maneuvering into place to bring the sword under their banner (setting up a PC-NPC-PC triangle with E.N. Lightenment, a PC cleric of that church).

John Fighter's player rolled a 2, a failure even after spending 1,100 gp hiring people at the Temple of the Skyfather to create a shrine for his sword Heart of the Mok where acolytes would be hired to recite its deeds four times a day. As my move in response to this failure, I decided that this would awaken the sword's materialism and ability to speak, neither of which have been prominent in the campaign until now: "You gave me my name, and now hearing it I have more words. I want to hear others speak my name more often! I want my name written in more letters of gold! Large letters of gold!"

E.N. Lightenment sacrificed corn, barley, alfalfa, and any other valuables he could get his hands on in order to ask the Killing Frost about the frost giants who were its other servants. His player rolled in the 7-9 range, so I gave him a choice of:

- a vision of the nearest giants
- what they were planning
- why they were here

He chose the vision, and then went back for another successful attempt to gain the other two. Here, I set up a PC-NPC-PC triangle by having the frost giants planning an attack on the character's Lawful patron Patriarch Zekon, which was supported by E.N.'s Chaotic superior Deaconess Caja.

The final AW-style move I used as we wrapped up the dungeon portion of the session was when John Fighter, expecting to go toe-to-toe with a fearsome elemental, quaffed the potion of heroism he'd been saving for the moment when he hoped to sire a worthy heir to his lost throne. The fight ended sooner than expected, so he decided to use the remaining duration of the potion to attempt to sire the heir on a nearby werebear named Broomhilda. I really wanted that to happen, so I didn't dice for the success, only the consequences. On a 7-9, he chose the first out of these:

- Broomhilda will still respect you
- you will not incur the jealousy of Berries, a male member of the werebear den
- word of these events will not reach Patriarch Zekon

Response from James_Nostack on hearing about this in the session writeup:

Quote
(picks jaw up off the floor)

Props for an innovative use of a magical item, but I think this means your heir is a bear.

I'd love to play actual Dungeon World with folks sometime to see how things work differently in a game that's been using this approach from the start & applies it to actual dungeons.

3
Dungeon World / Carousing Moves
« on: August 19, 2010, 11:45:33 AM »
I'm gearing up to use some basic moves in my next OD&D session on Sunday, and have created some custom moves for carousing. Some notes:

- the goal is to be an add-on to the OD&D rules; we're still using its system of experience points, level advancement, etc.

- these may replace or be an alternative to our existing rules, in which you first roll a d6, d8, or d12 depending on the size of the carousing town to see how many hundreds of gold pieces you can spend to gain XP (1:1 ratio) and then, if the result is higher than your PC's level, roll a saving throw to avoid negative consequences

- these are usually handled via forum, and are assumed to have a zoomed-out time/space so that the carousing roll summarizes roughly a week's off-stage activities

- these are generally minor tweaks of others' moves, adapted for the above

Here is the spending framework, for compatibility with the OD&D experience:

First, decide whether the carousing is "provincial" (village-level, 1d6 x 100), "metropolitan" (town-level, 1d8 x 125), or "cosmopolitan" (city-level, 1d12 x 150).

Then break each of these die ranges into three to figure out how much bonus to the roll you get per spend, e.g.:

Provincial:
200 gp, +1
400 gp, +2
600 gp, +3

Cosmopolitan:
600 gp, +1
1200 gp, +2
1800 gp, +3

Here, then, are the moves:

Quote
When you throw a big party, roll + spend. On a 7-9 choose 1, on a 10+ choose 3. In any case you earn XP equal to the spend.
  • You befriend a useful contact
  • There's gold left over when all's said and done
  • You gain a reputation; +1 to a future roll related to this carouse
  • Gain useful information
  • You do not do or say anything you might later regret while in your cups
  • Neither you nor the locale of your carousing is worse for wear in the morning

Quote
When you investigate a person, roll + spend. You earn XP equal to the spend. On a 7-9 hold 1, on a 10+ hold 3. Spend one hold to ask one of the following questions concerning that person:
  • Can any of their statements to you be proven false?
  • How have they treated others?
  • What are their likely goals?
  • Is there something they want to keep hidden?
  • How could you get them to do X?

The default assumption is that on a failure, word that you've been asking about them reaches the target; on a success (7+) no one brings word to the target, but the traces are there if they look. After the roll, you can use 1 hold or add 1 spend to prevent either of these; you don't get XP from that spend.

Quote
When you investigate a situation, roll+spend. You gain XP equal to the spend. On a 7+, you
can ask the DM questions. Whenever you act on one of the MC’s answers, take +1 to your next roll.
On a 10+, ask 3. On a 7–9, ask 1:

  • where’s my best way to approach, retreat from, or bypass this?
  • who else is interested in this?
  • who stands to benefit from this?
  • what should I be on the lookout for?
  • who’s in control here?
  • what’s the history here?

Quote
When you lavish gifts on someone, roll + spend. You earn XP equal to the spend. On a 7-9 hold 1, on a 10+ hold 3. Spend one hold for one of the following:

  • They do something that's in their power to help you
  • They provide information
  • One of your trespasses against them is forgiven
  • You can spend unguarded private time with them
  • They give you valuable gifts in return
  • No one else will know
  • Gratitude: +1 to a future roll related to this largesse

4
Apocalypse World / Help me understand the logic behind advancement?
« on: August 17, 2010, 10:15:21 PM »
Background:
My tastes as a gamer are strongly in favor of having what I think about achieving as a player be as similar as possible to what my characters are trying to achieve. As a result I'm unhappy with systems in which (for example) I'm expected to make moves that put my character in a dramatic dilemma to satisfy my player-desire for an interesting story, because this conflicts with my character-desire to stay out of trouble and be fat and happy.

Overall I'm very excited by Apocalypse World because it seems beautifully arranged to give my characters ways to act according to their desires that cut to the heart of generating interesting story.

However, something said about advancement rules in Tony's D&D hack subforum makes me think it might be a place where player desire and character desire don't match up:

There was some attempts to "game" the rules when players found that they had to hit certain stats to level up.  A lot of requests to Parley and Defy Danger just to gain levels.  After I laid down the law ("stop that.  no, seriously, you can't parley with everyone you meet just to get points") it seemed to clear up.

My feeling is that I want my character to parley only when it makes sense for them given the information they have about the world. They don't know that someone highlighted the associated stat, or that their Hx with the PC they're parleying with is at +4, but it seems like these are things I'm going to be wanting to think about when I choose moves in the game because I have a player-desire to advance.

Why is advancement the way it is? Or, put another way, what would I be missing out on if I swapped it out for some kind of hack where characters advanced on the basis of achieving things they're aware of in-game?  

5
Dungeon World / Outside the Dungeon
« on: August 16, 2010, 12:44:15 PM »
I've just finished reading AW and haven't delved into the hacks here, but wanted to start a conversation going about how I envision using them in order to get advice and maybe shape the way others are developing things.

My White Sandbox campaign has used (house-ruled) OD&D to play through levels 3-7 and Jaquays' _Caverns of Thracia_. We're now at a point where the characters have become entangled in some factional disputes within the Nameless City.

My feeling is that the Apocalypse World structure is going to be really good at handling stuff that involves negotiations, alliances, threats and bluffs, etc. However, I expect that I'd still reach for OD&D when it comes to dungeon exploration. What I'd like to do is to run:
 
- some sessions that will have the usual dozen players using OD&D to take 3rd-5th level characters into a specific dangerous locale and get into trouble

- some sessions that will have fewer players with higher-level characters, factional powers, minor demiurges, demon princelings, etc., whose interactions will help define the campaign world (both reacting to & inspiring events at the OD&D level)

In other words, what I'm looking for from an AW hack is support for the mid- to end-game. For a variety of reasons (group tradition, handling large groups, ease of introduction to new players) I'm still going to be reaching for OD&D when the level of action deals in resources like a quiver of arrows, a flask of oil, or a second-level spell; the need I'm looking to fill is when the level of action deals in resources like the enmity of an assassin's guild, a bargain with Jubliex, or the interplanar trade relationships of a magic item broker.

Pages: [1]