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 - nomadzophiel

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11
Apocalypse World / Re: Apocalypse World 2nd Edition
« on: June 17, 2015, 02:14:47 AM »
If you're going for Autumn, you might want to consider having a release party at the biggest Post-apocalyptic event in the country.

Apocalypse World / Re: Frenzy vs. manipulate on crowds
« on: February 26, 2015, 02:37:34 PM »
Yeah, its definitely edge cases where the fiction has already lead you to "yeah, that might work. OK, roll the dice and find out." Whereas the Hocus isn't really limited by that. If the mob has gathered around the Hold's walls because they want food, that's cool if you have food. If you're a Hocus, though, its not about food. Its about a group of people who are potential converts. Sure, they're starving but that's just another way of saying they need someone to take away their anxiety. Someone to turn all that emotion from resentment of the Hardholder to love for the guy who has a pipeline to the next world or a brighter future (or maybe anger towards Balls. That asshole's been trying to get you killed)! What they think they need doesn't matter. You can give them something they need in their souls.

That's a pretty big difference.

Apocalypse World / Re: Frenzy vs. manipulate on crowds
« on: February 26, 2015, 02:18:01 PM »
I just don't see the two as being at all similar. They're certainly not more similar than Go Aggro and a Tocuhstone's Towering Presence or Pack Alpha or even the Brainer's Puppet Strings (which "only" lets you do it with your brain instead of talking and guns). They're all "Do hard shit to make people do what you want" but their application and results are very different. Same thing here. There's a difference between "you can offer a mob just what they want to get them to do one thing" and "you can tell people what they want to hear (or don't) and get them to do any of these specific things." The leader of the mob might be an NPC. It might be a guy with Frenzy. Its never someone doing Manipulate for more than a moment. So, cool, Jesus is dead. Now the angry mob is coming for YOU because you promised the rains would come if the False Prophet were killed. Well he's dead, they've got blood on their hands, its been a whole five seconds and the skies haven't opened up yet. They did the thing now where's their pay? What else you got?

More mechanically, on a 10+ with leverage (which is its own problem since you can only leverage a mob if they all want the same thing already), Manipulate is still going to be at best as good as Frenzy on a 7+. What kind of leverage can you possibly have to make a mob bring forward all their precious things or fight for you? It has to be something worth more to them than those things. So maybe "if we don't fight to the last man, woman and child, that mindfucker and his army are going to make the survivors wish they were dead." The Hocus just has to say "Balls is using all of you! You're nothing to him but a source of revenue" which, y'know, everyone knew already but when the Hocus confronts them with that truth, he can get them pissed the fuck off enough to drag Balls out of his bar.  Of course, the Hocus can't use his hold to say "wait here" or break up a brawl without scattering everyone or get the group to form a human wall against an oncoming tank. You might be able to manipulate the right group with the right motivation to do any of those things.

As to aggro: If I'm facing a gang, I'd absolutely expect my Battlebabe to be able to say "run or die" and back it up with a grenade that puts her out of range of their weaponized herrings. That's aggro on a gang.  She's equipped to back it up with damage to all of them. They can't damage her back. And hey, if Balls runs a brothel, maybe he can seduce an entire mob. Its just that his crew is going to do the dirty work. :)

I'd agree that the vast majority of the time, these things (Aggro, Sieze, Manipulate) are one on one but specific circumstances can put a PC in  position where it makes sense for the MC to treat a group as a single target.

Apocalypse World / Re: Frenzy vs. manipulate on crowds
« on: February 26, 2015, 12:02:21 PM »
What maks it different to me. . .and don't get me wrong, I think your way is fine if its fine for your group. . .is the difference between leverage and truth, between doing one thing and hold for lots of things. It just seems anti-intuitive to me to say "you can treat a group of people as a gang, which is a single target with special details, but only for violence". Jesus (pronounced HAY-soos) Chrysler, The False Prophet (one day I will have a Hocus with this name) can convince people to break up Balls's bar, give him all the loot and go home quietly on a single good roll with some fancy words but no bribery. Balls can't convince people to attack Jesus's cult unless he offers them something that ALL of them are wiling to risk death for AND Jesus is right there for them to whack this instant. Even then, they're likely to break up and chase the bounty individually unless they're already an angry mob. If he wants Jesus's mystic Chrysler badge, that's going to be a separate deal that he has to figure out while there's an angry fuckin' mob around, one that's probably not going to stop just because Jesus died for their sins. On the other hand, he should at least be able to attempt to keep the bread line from turning into a bread riot with the promise that everyone will get fed and no one will be left out, if only because he could do the same thing with his meat cleaver.

Apocalypse World / Re: Frenzy vs. manipulate on crowds
« on: February 26, 2015, 02:24:07 AM »
OK, let me try a different approach here because if you're talking group psychology and what people would and wouldn't do and mob psychology, you're talking make AW seem real. Which is cool and I agree. The thing is, seems real doesn't really have any bearing on what is or isn't a move. So does it seem real that when Balls the Maestro'D offers to open a case of the good stuff for everyone, that they'll calm down instead of breaking the place up? Sure, maybe. Does it make sense that they'll just mob his crew and take his stuff? Sure, maybe. Maybe the Hardholder's gang is there to keep the peace. Then people are probably going to play nice because of the implied threat, no roll. If its just Balls the Maestro, who is hot as fuck and has the hookup, though, its a maybe.

Now Balls's life is already interesting (his life has been made not boring). There's a rowdy mob in his place that might get out of control and lay waste to it if he doesn't bring it under control NOW. Now Balls is a Devil With A Blade and has a huge ass meat cleaver. He could Go Aggro the entire group, treat them as a small gang and do 2-harm if they suck it up and a bunch of people would die. If that's what he wants, grab the dice. He could Seize his own place By Force. I can't think of any reason as a fan of his character to deny him the chance to do the same thing with Manipulate. It does seem real that if everyone calms down long enough for him to get the hooch out, open the crates, pour everyone a glass and hand them out that the crisis has passed. If that's what he wants to do, if the player specifies that he's addressing the crowd and saying "hey, let's take it down a notch. I'll get out a case of the good stuff and we can all be friends," its not my job to tell him he can't. He did it so he did it. He tried to manipulate the crowd in the fiction, so now he gets to try with the dice. Maybe in a 7-9 its not that easy and everyone starts chanting "booze! Booze! Booze!" and slamming their fists and bats and herrings and machetes against the furniture, breaking shit until it shows up. On a miss, its going to get real unpleasant real fast.

Apocalypse World / Re: Frenzy vs. manipulate on crowds
« on: February 23, 2015, 07:51:32 PM »
I know this has sat a while but this specific circumstance came up in the first AW game I played in. It went like this:

There's this gang and they have a hostage. They're riding up to the hold and the Quarantine is set up in a perfect sniper position. They have a sniper on another building. Go Aggro, dead. He says with "I kill the leader" and since they don't see it coming, that guy just dies but he has to Act Under Fire to keep his precarious perch while playing Rambo. 12+ (with advanced move) and he's transcendentally in the moment, riding the wave. He stands up and shouts loud enough to be heard despite all logic "stand down! Surrender and no one else dies!". He goes for Manipulate since as long as they don't threaten their hostage, he'll let them run and he'll take their vehicle as a consolation prize. Makes perfect sense to address and manipulate them as a single group. 12+ again! The MC's call was that one of them became an ally, the first one to recover his cool enough to take charge and tell the other guys to lower their weapons.

Now in this case, there were a few specifics that I'd require be there for future use:
1. Everyone being manipulated can clearly understand what's being offered and demanded.
2. Everyone can be convinced to do something with the exact same leverage and reasonably expect it to be delivered. If you're offering to feed people, you better be able to convince them you can feed everyone. If you're threatening violence, every single member must feel like they have a reasonable chance of getting hurt.
3. Everyone is being manipulated to do the exact same thing like "go home" or "surrender".

Even then, it might be easiest to just designate someone as mob/gang leader who has enough of a handle on them that they'll go along with it or not based on him.

Apocalypse World / Re: Artful and Gracious to stop brewing mob?
« on: February 22, 2015, 02:37:26 PM »
What about the move "Artful & gracious" with SWORDMASTERY? I mean, can it be used to attack people like in the Asian movies - all with the outcome "has to give a gift" meaning hold over (any) weapon (any) enemy got before the move? Even NOT TO really HARM anyone - just to GO THROUGH them... See some kung-fu movie, where the hero is going through enemies, taking their weapons - and after that all are ALIVE (and even not hurted)... It is more SKINNER move then Battlebabe (or even Gunlugger), not?!

To do it, do it, right? So what's your swordmaster doing? I mean, you're not doing damage because you're not going aggro or seizing by force, you're not acting under fire (unless you are) from other people swinging their swords back at you. So that sounds more like that scene where Bruce Lee or Tiger Claw (Six String Samurai) jumps down, squares off with his opponent and does some showy moves to try and intimidate him. Maybe you'e so impressive his boss wants to hire you now.

If its in the middle of an active fight, yeah, I'd say that's Acting Under Fire as the people on he other side try to kill you while you try to show off. So failing the Artful roll wouldn't get you stabbed but failing the Act Under Fire would.

AW:Dark Age / Re: New playbook for DA: the spymaster.
« on: September 19, 2014, 02:01:45 PM »

- Maybe a master of spies (like Varys) and a master spy himself (like Garrett) are too much different characters to fit into a single playbook : see the War-Captain and the War-Champion for example. I would focus on the master of spies, remove the roguish rights (vanish, fight...) and replace them with narrative rights.

I definitely agree with this. James Bond and M, Jaqen H'gar and Varys, the Angels and Charlie - agents have a different skill set from handlers. A Spymaster is more like the Maestro D', sitting at the center of a web and reaching out through other people. I'm not even sure what a superspy of the age would look like. In the Renaissance, the spy game was mostly courtiers. That's not as much of a thing in the Dark Ages. I don't think there's really a dedicated thief/rogue/agent in this setting. Just other playbooks with hidden loyalties.

AW:Dark Age / Re: experience question
« on: September 18, 2014, 02:19:54 PM »
Oh, good point. I was implicitly linking season with session.

AW:Dark Age / Re: experience question
« on: September 18, 2014, 01:32:33 PM »
By the math, the earliest you're going to get one from experience is your first session. For that, the MC, the Players and your Season right all have to put XP in the same place.  If one of the three are out of alignment, you'll get one n your second session.

Apocalypse World / Re: The Maestro D' and Barter
« on: September 18, 2014, 01:58:37 AM »
I think, for me at least, asking for a working tank is like asking for an alien blaster. Sure, everyone wants to find you one, because being on the Maestro D's short list for the next party is a good place to be. Thing is, it just doesn't exist, at least as far as anyone knows. Now if Balls shows up with a ray gun or the local warlord rolls out a tank, the Maestro D' can say she wants that particular item. Then it comes with its own consequences when Mox comes rolling into town with a tank gunning full speed to stay ahead of the previous owner's enforcer gang. Or even ok, yeah, its yours for now. No one knows who stole it and gave it to you. Of course, if the owner finds out you've got it. . . well, that's the hard move for a missed roll.

AW:Dark Age / Re: Court Wizard - No Enchantments?
« on: September 16, 2014, 01:58:13 PM »
Well, a 12 year old can't because there's no 12 year old playbook. I suppose I should have specified "Any PC". NPC's would have whatever back story, materials and rituals I think fit the story and the principles. Maybe there's a big Threat that can combine sacrifices and effectively turns every soldier his army kills into an undead flesh eater (a weaker conversion rate than seven dead for 12 zombies). That's pretty apocalyptic right there.

My personal take is that these things aren't necessarily widely known or practiced but they're the kind of thing that a PC can find out easily enough either through Literacy, asking around or maybe a Weird roll. Its difficult to go from the general framework to a specific circumstance and I definitely won't have time for a playtest before November but I'm really hoping someone in my group tries this. Maybe that bounty of goods requires a bunch of red capped mushrooms that allow you to leave your body. I just personally feel like the cost and consequences will slow people down enough that someone without the right doing enchantments is going to be very consequential. I'm inclined to err on the side of permissiveness in that situation.

I used the Merlin example precisely because it sounds like someone who didn't have the right but did it anyway. You're right, though, that he clearly had knowledge that Uther didn't.

AW:Dark Age / Re: What Is a Right?
« on: September 16, 2014, 01:48:27 PM »
David, I think I was driving at the same thing from the other direction. By and large your rights just work because when your rights are denied, its a big deal. So if the people of Urbandale universally don't respect the Wicker Wise's rights, the story (at least for that player) is now about either the struggle to maintain her rights or what a Wicker Wise is supposed to do in the world if the world doesn't need sacrifices and enchantments. So its generally a given that rights are respected and people don't do the things they don't have a right to. Any time there's a variation from that, the spotlight turns on, the audience focuses in and leans forward to see what will happen next.

AW:Dark Age / Re: Court Wizard - No Enchantments?
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:17:01 PM »
Well, I'm not sure sacrifices would stack for one thing. One body per enchantment. So if the War Chief wants a zombie army he'd have to give a bounty, 1 Health and a life in a shrine sacred to his gods in a ritual lasting an entire season to create one. If he then released someone from an oath and prayed for forgiveness from the Wicker Hag he could have his 12

but. . .

He doesn't have the right to do any of this and its not exactly something that can be done in secret. He's asked his gods to raise the dead for him paying a price in blood and lives. This is almost a stereotypical evil ritual. Do his gods like the Wicker Hag and vice versa? Has he done anything requiring the forgiveness of the Wicker Hag? Because he's just spent a whole season drawing her attention in a different god's sanctuary. Are either the Wicker Hag or his gods going to be happy about that? How are the crown and the Court Wizard going to feel about it? What about the priesthood? How about the people who produced the bounty that he sacrificed to turn their dead family members into an undead army?

For a Wicker Wise, its more or less a given that she can do this in a shrine to the Wicker Hag without having to worry about most of that because its her right.

On the other hand, a Court Wizard gives blood and bounty in a shrine to make the someone fall in love with his lord for one night.  He doesn't have the right either but this is exactly the Merlin/Uther story. There were plenty of consequences to come out of that one night.

I like the idea of enchantments being available but consequential to people who don't have the right.  Someone denied a right that they do have should be consequential. So should someone doing something that they have no right to.

AW:Dark Age / Re: What Is a Right?
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:58:04 PM »
I guess what I'm driving at, and I admit I'm processing it as I go along, is that at first glance, rights appear to be social conventions. You have the right to free speech because the Constitution says so. The Wicker Wise has the right to her sacrifice because her people say that she does. When you start digging, though, that's not really how they work.

On the one hand, rights stem from personal belief. You can respond to your right being denied because its your right. No one is allowed to tell you that you can't exercise it and be free of consequence. Its your right because you say it is. If you look at the options when your right is denied, most of them come down to this. Its on you to stand up for your rights.

On the other hand, rights exist because the rules of the game say that they exist. If a fellow player is denying your rights left and right, cutting off what makes your character cool, you're explicitly allowed to hold that against them.  Its your right because the rules say it is.

On the third hand, rights exist because without those rights, the playbook ceases to exist. A wise woman who can't make a yearly human sacrifice, enchant people and take a young girl as a student isn't a Wicker Wise. A man at arms who can't command an army isn't a War Chief. A counselor who ignores his sabbath and can't cast out demons is not a Court Wizard. Its your right because your character isn't your character without it.

In general I'd say yes, your people are inclined to respect your rights. Those rights are part of their world view and if they judge you fairly, it would take some major circumstances for them to not come down on your side. Even other people are inclined to respect it. Having the right alone is no guarantee of that. It does mean that anyone will think twice about denying your right because you might pursue vengeance, bring down the wrath of the gods or hold it against the PC/MC. That recourse may not seem terribly meaningful compared to fighting trolls or enemy strongholds but it makes it clear to all and sundry that there will be consequences.

If you deny the Wicker Wise's sacrifice (its such an easy example) because killing innocent people is wrong, you do it with full foreknowledge that you are not preventing a murder, you are preventing a murder by declaring war on an entire way of life. You can expect this to snowball if you try to punish her for the inevitable enchantment that she puts on you. If she decides to suffer with dignity, she is agreeing with you that her way of life is less valid than yours. You can expect her to try to turn the followers of the Old Ways against you. You can expect the Wicker Man to become angry and visit a plague or a drought or something on your people. For her part, the Wicker Wise now has a motivation to be proactive in the game world and you can both play to find out which way of life can survive.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11