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 - Pigeon

Pages: 1 [2]
16
Apocalypse World / Re: A couple questions about the Operator
« on: August 07, 2011, 11:49:48 PM »
Quote from: Jim Crocker on August 05, 2011, 12:26:08 AM
That's helpful, yes!

Here's the question I am unclear on, and that's why anyone would actively seek to roll on Obligation gigs?

My best guess is that because if you do and get a hit, that means that whatever that gig is about can't bother you at all this session, while if you ignore it, the MC has it available as a threat to call in if one of her Moves allows? Otherwise, it seems like you'd never bother, because why risk it?

Unworked gigs give you neither profit nor catastrophe. A lot of the obligation gigs are things like (everything is okay/horrible disaster), so if you don't work it...everything is not okay, because that would be profit.  There are some specific examples of this on p. 264 and 265; if you have the (you keep them happy/you fucking blow it) obligation, for example, and you don't work it, you don't blow it, but they're definitionally not happy.

So, yeah, basically as you say, an unworked gig is an opportunity to the MC. Or an opening for a threat, if you prefer to think of it that way.

17
Apocalypse World / Re: holdless scenarios?
« on: August 01, 2011, 08:06:22 PM »
Quote from: Chris on August 01, 2011, 05:49:34 PM
I can't address the actual game, since I've not seen it, and I'm not trying to attack it or anything. I don't know anything about Saffron or what kinda problems she has. I can only address the post. But suggesting that people have enough to eat and are immune from sickness because a character who's nominally in charge does not have the wealth move is not sitting happy in my brain.

1) I'm straight-up not sure what your goal is in this thread if it's not to say that we're not playing the game right!

2) I'm fascinated by you cutting out the bit of my post where I said that we do deal with issues of scarcity.

3) Nobody's suggesting that everybody is fat and happy. The point being made is that making sure people get enough to eat and don't get sick isn't actually anybody's problem.  There probably are some people who are starving or diseased, but if they fall behind, they get left behind. We're a travelling rave! There are villages and places where people live, but we're not them.

18
Apocalypse World / Re: holdless scenarios?
« on: August 01, 2011, 01:21:00 PM »
Quote from: Chris on August 01, 2011, 08:53:08 AM
No. This is bad. The wealth roll isn't to create bad things; it's to limit the bad things to just one or two and that on a missed roll. Pseudo-holders without the wealth roll in my games? It's tooth and nail. Your people, they're hungry and diseased and savage and idle, all of these at all of the times that there are, and what do you do about it?

This seems a bit harsh. The hardholder has all the responsibility because he also has all the wealth and power.  That's why the move is called "wealth" and not "actual good government."  The maestro's pretty well-off in general, but definitionally, they don't have the resources the hardholder has, because they don't have the power base, and so they don't have the problems maintaining that power base either. In our actual play, scarcity is a very real issue -- I don't think it's easy at all! The worst part about trying to deal with the rave is that there's no actual organization to get things done. (As Smith would say, obviously.)

19
Apocalypse World / Re: AP: Traveling rave, creepy forests, and techno-trances
« on: July 31, 2011, 09:52:40 PM »
Quote from: Elizabeth on July 31, 2011, 01:49:22 PM
Third doesn't really HAVE anything of value, and is tiny and weak and has been coughing up blood a lot lately, so Rhyme is pretty livid that Smith is trying to negotiate for an actual HUMAN BEING.

Third has a MAGICAL AMBULANCE that has shiny glowing lights and brings people back from the dead!  Admittedly it makes people go crazy, but still.  (This was before you guys destroyed it turning his fiancee into a crazy hate-filled grey zombie.) Also, maybe I would know he coughs up blood if you let him OUT once in a while.

20
Apocalypse World / Re: Problem: gunlugger that's not a gunlugger
« on: July 25, 2011, 03:58:43 PM »
Quote from: Allison on July 25, 2011, 02:21:56 PM
For the former: what vibe, and for the latter, intrinsic qualities, obviously. She's not a Battlebabe because Battlebabes are horrifically misnamed. Battlebabes aren't hardcore fighters. They are rogues.

You're bringing this to the piece. I'm playing a battlebabe right now, and Smith is not a rogue.

21
Apocalypse World / Re: Problem: gunlugger that's not a gunlugger
« on: July 25, 2011, 01:44:21 PM »
Quote from: Allison on July 25, 2011, 12:14:33 PM
I did have the thought of picking some alternate, less "fancy" equipment--like, say, a sledgehammer (perhaps 3-harm hand ap messy, since hammers were historically used to ruin the day of people in armour), though your suggestion, and mine, run the risk of making powerful items too cheap, because really, how much barter is that junkyard stuff worth? (I had to shake the details out of my MC, but she ponied up that she'd expect a player to be able to pony up 3 or 4 barter to get an FOBG or AP ammo, and that's with special arrangements, assuming they didn't have to take the knife discount.)

I did consider perhaps asking for some equipment with the "embedded" tag, akin to the guillotine chokehold (which I did take), but that runs into the problem of exactly how much is the "embedded" tag worth and where do you draw the line between "embedded" equipment and moves (i.e., 2-armour embedded vs. Impossible Reflexes)?

I have to say, I feel like this is a little overcomplicated.  If you want melee weapons instead of guns, take them instead -- just substitute the faceless equipment list, which has lots of nice weapons. Or substitute the battlebabe's custom melee weapons for some of your guns. (I have to say, I have no idea what makes your character a gunlugger, if she doesn't have any guns, has fancy melee weapons, and doesn't run around in extremely heavy armor. That's a battlebabe to me!)

22
Apocalypse World / Re: Playbook: The Shifted
« on: July 21, 2011, 03:11:36 PM »
Hx: The way the Hx rules work, you only ever tell people things on your turn, and only write stuff down on other people's turn.  Maybe what you want is:

"On your turn, choose the player with the highest +weird. Tell them Hx +2. Tell everybody else Hx -2.  Take the number everybody else tells you and write it down."

Kinship: If you want the character to have a relationship to the maelstrom, just give them one.

"You have an Hx with the psychic maelstrom. This means you can roll to help it or interfere with it. It starts at +2."

Vaporous: "When you suffer harm, suffer 1 less harm." By analogy with merciless/blood-crazed. Could it break something? Maybe. I definitely wouldn't give this guy any armor at all to start off.  But if people want to kill you, they'll find a way.  I also agree that you should just cut Insubstantial -- doing EVERYTHING under fire is a problematic mechanic, and it's not like 2-armor is just floating around.

On the subject of equipment, I'm not really sure why this guy gets awesome melee weapons.  I love the idea of your hands becoming ap, but probably as a move (and probably just 1-harm).  It also plays strongly against Fibrillation.  Why not:

"Fibrillation: your touch is a weapon (1-harm hand ap)."

Advancement: Why does this guy get three new shifted moves?  That puts him in the rarefied company of the faceless as the only characters to get three new moves from their own book.

Pages: 1 [2]