I don’t feel that I’m nitpicking the word “healthy” here actually. Honestly I don‘t. I’m taking the entirety of what Ebok said to mind, not just that singular word. It was even so very nicely put in ALL CAPS for everyone.

-

And hell yeah, Manipulate is great! :D  And a far better way than Highlighting for the group to get a player to "do what they want to see the character do this session" too.

-

Are you actually interested in my opinion? Because obviously none of us will convince the other! Ever! We maybe/probably want different things out of a game? I want meaningful choices. Choices that will be difficult and change the situation and my character. Where I have to fret and worry over what choice to make.

Highlighting doesn’t provide meaningful choices to me (in this way). It simply asks, “do you want to follow the fiction; Or do you want to be rewarded?” Obviously there are times the two intersect if the correct stat happens to be Highlighted at the correct time. But "at times" is kinda sucky.

-

On Player Agency:

Sure, I will agree that I’m being loose with the player agency definition. Or am I?…

So yes, I’m mainly referring to the reward cycle, I agree with that! However, they are linked! System Matters right? By the reward cycle being the way it is the system is rewarding the player by forcing the player to use the Highlighted stats that other people chose according to their own agenda. So, no agency there. And of course that doesn’t exactly limit game-fiction choices, but it does take away game-fiction agency even if it is indirectly.

Because Highlighting is placing an incentive to roll a stat that the player had no say in with the penalty of not getting rewarded. And the fiction had no say in it either: follow the fiction and don’t get rewarded or follow the mechanics and get rewarded. That isn’t a meaningful choice to me, so I could argue that player agency was taken.

[And I was going to post more, and respond to the D&D stuff. But meh.] :p

Hrm. Internet conversations are almost always pointless and I‘m getting that niggling feeling here. And I’d have to write a several thousand word essay to get my points across since I can’t mind-meld with you. Because you all make valid points, yet manage to utterly miss what I’m saying.

First and most importantly: yes hacking it will change the feel. And to be honest I think that’s a good thing. Play it the way it’s meant to be played first and then form your own opinion and hack if needed.

Also: I was responding to the Ebok’s complete confidence that AW Highlighting system is the perfectest system evar and it couldn’t possibly be more perfecter and that it somehow is obviously superior to any other Powered by the Apocalypse system for experience. And again, I can’t disagree more firmly! I really can’t! Every fiber of my being screams it. And there are plenty of hacks that do a FAR-FAR-FAR superior job than AW does. Urban Shadows is my current example of greatness in an AW-hack.


++ Warning: very rambly and unimportant part because opinions are like bung-holes ++

Seriously. Opinions man. What's the point in this convo?

Here is the TL;DR version: I WANT FICTIONAL REASONS FOR CHALLENGING MY CHARACTER’S PERCEPTIONS, PORTRAYAL, AND CHANGING THEIR VIEWS ON LIFE! I love that shit! Play to find out and a system that encourages that in the fiction - because System Matters. Highlighting has nothing to do with the fiction, so it fails. It has to do with some weird group-social-pressure enforced by mechanics to try and force the player into portraying their character in a particular way - to grab for experience points. And in my experience Highlighting leads to exactly the opposite of fiction-mechanic fueled choices! In short, I find Highlighting to be a dysfunctional system separate from the fiction.

How is stat Highlighting somehow encouraging my character to surprise me? The group is surprising me maybe by forcing their shitty agenda down my throat. And it is certainly destroying any chance for the fiction to surprise my choices. Some Moves change the fiction and surprise me certainly. Not stat Highlighting ever though.

Second, I’m happy to talk about my baggage, but this will take thousands of words and ultimately be pointless. I should probably say I like Powered by the Apocalypse games. They are my equal favorite games to Burning Wheel! My Actual Play examples were simply to highlight how stat-Highlighting sucks. Harhar. And yes, maybe you haven’t experienced this. Or maybe you just weren’t cognizant that it was occurring? I don’t know I wasn’t there.

And now the rambly-ramblonic-rambles. Seriously this is rambly!...

Yes I’ve had some shitty groups. Plural on the groups there. But some good groups too! And I’ve found a lot of people (emphasis on a lot of people!) play at a very superficial level - they do awesome voices and gesticulate and entertain the table and jump around and all that, but portraying an actual person? That deep down emotional level shit - yeah, good luck - they‘d have a better chance of ripping their way out of a wet paper bag. This is surprisingly common I‘ve found! Surprisingly!

To point out my hypocrisy here: yes I did the same shallow shit with my Chopper by humping everything he could hump, dick in hand. But my point remains: and you haven’t, and I’d ague that you can’t disprove, that a system that uses stat Highlighting will produce any other outcome. Simply put: I followed the reward system. Therefore that is what the game - the system - wants me to do! I did what the game said to do. And there is no way you can argue against that. None. LOL!

Highlighting only encourages this bad behavior! So yes, I hate stat Highlighting. I don’t find that it does what you all seem to think it does. At all. After years of playing this game. The fiction - in AW’s case -  does what you are trying to say stat Highlighting does.

Which brings me to: it looks like you both think I’m some newb. I’ve been playing AW since the day it came out, I‘m very familiar with it and most of the hacks too. The whole "are you playing to find out what happens" question is very telling. Of course I am! And Highlighting stats has always been a peeve of mine. Along with Go Aggro (my most hated Move) - I’ve stated this publicly many times.

So yes, I get where you think I’m coming from, and I get where you're coming from. And it’s a nice ideal - but it’s just not true. And while you said BW is irrelevant to the discussion I disagree, comparisons are always used in every debate ever debated. Learn to deal with it! That said: Burning Wheel has a FAR superior system in regards to challenging the character’s perceptions and getting a character to change. I can’t emphasize enough that I think BW is way better at doing what you seem to think Highlighting does. And I love it when my character grows and changes in unexpected ways! LOVE. IT. But…

Highlighting stats doesn’t do that. The fiction would do that! Simply put: Highlighting only encourages certain stat-Moves to be used. That‘s it. That‘s all it does. Honestly! My character humping every NPC’s leg doesn’t say anything about my character other than my Hot stat is Highlighted and I‘m getting rewarded for it with experience points. And that that is what the group wanted to see. And they got it. Again System Matters.

Or if you prefer: it says that my character - that I explicitly stated has no interest in socially manipulating people - suddenly is trying to manipulate people and trying to stick his dick in them. Ripping him out of the established fiction. There is no fictional reason for choosing Highlights. Just some weird social-pressure that the group thought it would be awesome to see my character fuck-toy everyone. Again, I think it is fairly dysfunctional. And I’m just doing it because a Highlight mechanic told me I’m supposed to and I’m getting rewarded for it! So I stuck my character‘s dick in everything.


This next part is so off topic I’m not sure why I’m even responding to it. Seriously? You’re going to argue what a character would do? Isn’t that what we play to find out? And no: stat-Highlighting doesn’t do that - as I’ve stated, and will state, again and again and again. The fiction does that. Highlighting actively works against this ideal.

All I can say about the pacifist is that I completely disagree. My character wasn’t some paladin. He manipulated everyone to his own ends, got people to fight for him or to back down, rallied people to his banner. I mean pretty epic stuff. But he refused to cross that line, so being Hard doesn’t fit into that. And having somebody say that they want to see my character lose his shit and start shooting stuff or whatever? Make me make my character do it within the fiction. Challenge my Beliefs (to use a BW term) and Ideals. I don’t need this stat Highlighting shit to try to encourage that behavior. And it doesn‘t, it can’t.

Force my character’s hand in the fiction! Don’t force my player hand systematically! Make my character make a choice in the fiction. And you know what? I’d have not budged. And that says something about the character! More than Highlighting a stat ever will that‘s for sure! All that said was, "you don't get xp this session" or as I've stated, "destroy the fiction to get rewarded". Yuck!

AW’s system just encourages people to roll their Highlighted stat. That doesn’t say anything about the character at all. It only says that the player has picked up on the reward system. A system that actively encourages shallow character behavior! As I’ve demonstrated. Again and again.

And somewhat ironically you actually contradicted yourself Ebok. Several times. Pink Ponies = Stat Highlighting. It is something forced on the player, like the Pink Ponies.
I'd also disagree about agency in comparing DW to AW. Things like Alignment and Bonds have everything to do with player agency and choice. Highlighting does not.

P.S. I hate D&D and I haven't touched the game in a decade. Because I want to "play to find out what happens" for exactly the same reasons you gave Munin. It was just an example. Do you need another game-example you can nit-pick? :p

Yeah, this conversation is probably done. Put a fork in it. :)

I agree that hacking the system will make for a different experience. However...

THIS IS NOT A HEALTHY DYNAMIC. It works for some playergroups, but I've yet to see it work as smoothly as Highlighting behavior.

Huh. I pretty much couldn't disagree more. I've found that highlighting makes for weird behavior. I'd even say it "IS NOT A HEALTHY DYNAMIC".

For example, and this is just one example, there are many. My group decided to highlight my Chopper's Hot stat. His worst stat because I as a player wasn't interested in being Hot. Not at all (and no this isn't about it being his worst stat I get xp regardless of success so who cares in-game about that I'm talking about as a player. M'kay?).

So the whole session my character was acting in a completely different way to his character. Character fidelity: gone! Why? Simple: I was gunning for experience.

That is another point: the group chooses FOR YOU. You don't get a say in it. Here have a link. Player control is gone baby gone.

So my character went around seducing everyone (I would have seduced a lamp if it would've gotten me xp) and manipulating everyone. And even though we spent a couple session with him being Hard, he didn't get into a single fight because Hard wasn't highlighted.

So it was sexy Chopper time. And COMPLETELY out of character because - as you said - the players should be going after the experience. And that's what I did.

So plausiblefabulist and I already hashed this out via email.

But since you, Antinomian Tendencies replied I'll take another stab at it.

I'm not talking about excluding ANYONE. I'm talking about not putting ANY real-world religion in AT ALL. Which means by that definition it would actually be IMPOSSIBLE to EXLUDE a real-world religion.

Because really, by your definition the game should include EVERY religion present during the early Middle Ages. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. And there are a bunch YOU are excluding too then.

Do I get to be all huffy that MY religion would be ignored??????

Don't worry. If "Bloodless Xristos" is ambiguous enough for you, everything I write will be.

-Vincent

Cool. So far, without an additions, it is ambiguous enough. Not that I wouldn't play AW: DA if you just flat-out stated it is the dark ages, because I would.

--

And just because I thought of a couple examples that amused me about the differences, as I see them, with analog vs. ambiguous:

A dragon is an analog of a lizard. Sure it flies and breathes fire. But ultimately it looks like a lizard. Scales, head, legs, etc.. But with a few fictional additions.

A platypus is an ambiguous animal. What is it?!? A duck because it lays eggs and has a bill? A beaver because its a mammal and has the fur and the tail? And then add in the poisonous spur. It seems ambiguous to me rather than analogous of a specific animal.

I think I’ve said what I wanted to say: oh please Vincent keep the religions ambiguous! But it looks like I’m not going to get that.

Firstly because the group being able to choose whether one’s game is 100% the real-world Judeo-Christian religion, or whether it is something more resembling A Song of Ice and Fire, or something in between, I think, is a good thing. If nothing else it opens up various play options.

Second because of what we accidentally/unintentionally demonstrated just now. And which proved to be one of the, if not the most, uncomfortable experience of my entire life.

Unless the game is 100% about taking on real-world religions through the fictional medium of a game (like, say, Dogs in the Vineyard), and wants to explicitly tackle those issues. Because even printing in the book things like Pintoos Piloot or the messiah Gesuus, makes the game about that. In a real-world way. Even if it wasn’t supposed to be about that.

The game can’t just do more than ambiguously reference it, not even an analog of real-world religions, in my opinion (ambiguous is fine). Why? Because of what I already said, but also because religion (and politics) are very easy to take incorrectly and/or misunderstand people in ways that are entirely unhealthy. Hot-button sensitive topic. And because they are such emotionally charged issues they can’t help but be thrust to the forefront of the issues. Even in a fictional game. Even if the game wasn’t originally supposed to be about religion, it will be about religion.

I feel like the group can make the game about tackling issues of religion. I’ve done the same in games, in a safe environment. But I don’t think that this game is about that. And putting analogs of real-world religions makes it about tackling those issues. Even if it would be unintentional. As we just demonstrated.

So to use your words: cool, funhouse-mirror, reimagined fictional analog [of real-world religions] is fine as long as “analog” is replaced with ambiguous. Obviously my opinion. Because the difference as I see it is one of “analog = basically the same with a few differences like adding in fictional names of real-world religious things” versus “ambiguous = can be taken one way, but also could be taken another way“.

EDIT: and I would say that any references to A Song of Ice and Fire or any other fictional world should be removed. Just say it is the Dark Ages with different analogous names for real-world things if that is what it is! (That might come off like I'm mad. I'm not. At all. I just think it is a bad thing to mislead people by saying "hey you can play a game analogous to A Song of Ice and Fire or something more closesly analogous to the real-world" and then not deliver both of those options).

Maybe I should add why I don't/didn't like Go Aggo as an MC? It felt like I was just making a judgement call anyway. Okay, so I can choose take damage or back down. Couldn't I have done that anyway? That's all covered by the fiction.

The first time I MC'ed back in early 2011 I had a player that went aggro on a 7-9 and I had the NPC "back up with hands up" and the players said, "WTF?!? I just shoot him then". And it was at that moment that I questioned what the move was really good for.

And Manipulate sometimes felt artificial. Like just going up and cold-reading somebody and just knowing innately how to manipulate them or just being so charismatic that they just blindly follow whatever you wanted them to do regardless of how ridiculous it is (which would be a good custom or playbook move).

I felt like the player should have to have some leverage already in order to manipulate them. Which meant they had to talk to them and Read them or just already know what it is that can get them to do what you want them to do. But then I wondered what Manipulate was for because if they have leverage they don't really need to manipulate them, because a player can always choose to "not keep their promise". So really all I needed was a move that let the player find out what they needed to find out and the manipulation takes care of itself. And I went in circles.

EDIT:

That's what the real crux of this question is: can you escalate your demand after a refusal? If so, is it just the same Move again?

I think that the player in this scenario jumped the gun and now he has to deal with real consequences, maybe he should've Drawn him Out first or reinforced his position first. But also I think that +1 is awesome for now Drawing him Out at the point of your sword and getting the lord to say what it is he actually wants from you.

Like what Aaron Friesen said. You now know where the lord stands, he doesn't respect the sworn oath he made. Do something about it! (By Drawing him Out). Or get other lords to back you because they don't like that the lord is backing out of an oath (there's an adventure). Now that the situation has changed and you have some other lords backing your claim, I could see rolling for Claiming Your Right again. Or the MC can just decide that the lord isn't going to mouth off now, so he joins with you, but will probably backstab you the first chance he gets. And that's hot.

To tie it back in with what I said above: I actually prefer the way the moves work together now and they feel like they hold water now and flow from the fiction better.

I also think the problem is that Claim Your Right makes it sound like you can just claim whatever you want and on a successful roll you get it (like Manipulate does in AW). That would suck and make me cry.