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 - SoylentWhite

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
46
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 21, 2012, 07:05:11 PM »
Something that I think might be useful to state would be how much posting you would want per week.

Reason is, I was in a PbP (a 40k one, actually) that ended a couple of months back.  Don't get me wrong, it was fun, but it was also totally dominating over everything else I was up to, and I (and possibly others) don't want to get into that kind of situation again.

And additionally, I would quibble one thing: by my reading of the rules (which could be wrong), it's impossible to have twisted +3, as that means you're at 12.00 on the corruption clock and instant death/npc-hood.  (I'm assuming the relationship is correlative, rather than inverse, but I don't remember seeing it spelled out anywhere.)  This has the effect of not only making twisted-centric characters (such as, most notably, psychers) mechanically weaker, but also, they easily gain corruption, which makes them incredibly short lived as they need to take mutations/debilities pretty much every time.  Not to mention the 7-9 results on twisted rolls often have some pretty nasty stuff happening.

Don't get me wrong, there are some interesting ideas there, but unless I'm missing something, twisted seems like it could do with more work.

But that's just my opinion, of course.

Edit: also, Chaomancer: 40k has a *ludicrous* amount of canon.  I've played in a 40k game before (not the one mentioned above) with some guys who knew their stuff (I don't, I'm just familiar with the tabletop armies) and they were dropping references, histories, you name it, very regularly.  I think it's all in the novels.

47
Apocalypse World / Re: New Playbook: The Seeker
« on: May 20, 2012, 07:42:27 PM »
Like those names.  Copied them in.  Will whittle down if more are suggested.  Thanks.

I understand where you're coming from with your comments about 'A New Beginning', that is something I have considered, but so far, I've decided to go with it.  Reason being to do with XP flow.

What do I mean?  Well, take the Gunlugger, I reckon they get 80% of their XP during 20% of their playtime - short, intense bursts of action, followed by winding springs for the next bout of violence.

Skinner's XP gain is, I feel, more spread out.  A bit of hot here, an act under fire there.  Pretty steady and consistent.

I wanted to try and encourage this playbook to be like the Gunlugger's 20% all the time.  That's why I've got the moves to ignore debilities, ignore dying.  If the MC sees this playbook, he should see it as the player holding out his hands and yelling 'come at me, bro.  Gimme your best shot.'

The point I am trying to make, in my typically obfuscatory way, is I *want* this move to be farmed.  Because every time the Seeker does so, it should be because they've just massively rocked the boat, which brings consequences down on their head.

Basically, they get XP when they rock the boat.  They get XP when they take debilities because of the consequences of that.  All that is aimed at making this candle burn twice as brightly for half as long.  And when it goes out, nothing will ever be the same.

Does it work?  I don't know.  Haven't playtested it.  I've adjusted the language slightly to make it clearer what my intentions are, but I am open to ideas on improving this.

48
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 20, 2012, 05:43:45 PM »
Yup, working.

49
Apocalypse World / Re: New Playbook: The Seeker
« on: May 20, 2012, 05:42:52 PM »
Well, if you notice, 'My game, my rules' is automatically chosen, so bare fists are already area AP harm, so there is literally no way to defend against it (sure, it's a base of at most 1-harm, but there needed to be some balancing here).

Considering the small amount of harm NPCs can take before dying, to my mind, you first inflict 1-2 harm normally (the fight) before using 'The Truth' as the 'evolve or die' climax of the fight.  If they choose to die, head asplode is just MC colour.  If I remember FotNS correctly (I probably don't, it's been a long time), there was always a fight before the big finish.

But yes, that is totally the kind of genre this is trying to emulate.

50
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 20, 2012, 04:02:13 PM »
Might just be me (haven't used Google drive before), but, as you suspected, the links don't seem to work, both just link me to a 'try Google drive' page.

51
Apocalypse World / New Playbook: The Seeker
« on: May 20, 2012, 01:33:00 PM »
Well, I've criticised other people's playbooks a fair amount before, guess it's time to put my barter where my mouth is.

Inspiration is partly the Spectacle's excellent 'moment of clarity' move, partly the Touchstone, and partly the 'wandering loner' archetype, such as seen in the old 'Kung Fu' TV series.  Apologies if anyone's trod similar ground before.

Some bits of this, I really like.  Others, I just couldn't think of anything better.

The Seeker

Violence.  Everywhere you go, it's nothing more than a tool for the strong to oppress the weak.

But it's more than that.  Much more.  You don't know what it is.  But you intend to find out.

One fight at a time.


Name
Windy, Ichi, Knuckles, Bear, Lee, Combo Breaker, Roy, Jet, Chuck, Laughing Chan, Stripes, Cassius, Thumper, Dempsey, Mr. One-Two, Slugger.

Stats
Cool: +0   Hard: +2   Hot: -1      Sharp: +2   Weird: -1
Cool: +1   Hard: +2   Hot: -1      Sharp: +0   Weird: +1
Cool: -1   Hard: +2   Hot: +0      Sharp: +1   Weird: +1
Cool: +2   Hard: +2   Hot: -1      Sharp: -1   Weird: +0


Moves
You get all the basic moves.
You take 'My game, my rules' and 2 other seeker moves


Hx
Everyone introduces their characters by name, look and outlook. Take your turn.
List the other characters’ names.
Go around again for Hx. On your turn:
One of the other characters is relying on you to help them.  Tell them Hx +3.
One of them views violence as a mere tool.  Tell them Hx -2.
One of them has helped you out before, against their better judgement.  Tell them Hx +1.
On the others' turns:
One of them doesn't understand violence, and you're going to teach them.  Ignore what they say and write Hx +3.


Look
Man, woman, transgressing.

Ragged wear, showy wear, robes, leathers.

Kind face, naïve face, worn face, angry face, determined face.

Serene eyes, piercing eyes, blind eyes, tired eyes.

Strong back, tattooed back, heavily muscled back, weathered back.


Seeker Special
When you have sex with someone else, they mark XP, but are subsequently targeted by enemies.  You have +1 ongoing in attempts to protect/rescue/avenge them.

Advancements
Get +1 Cool (max +2)
Get +1 Hard (max +3)
Get +1 Sharp (max +2)
Get +1 Weird (max +2)
Get a new seeker move
Get a new seeker move
Get a move from another playbook
Get a move from another playbook
-----
Get +1 to any stat (max +3)
Walk off into the sunset
Create a second character to play
Change your character to a new type
Choose 3 basic moves and advance them
Advance the other 4 basic moves.

Moves

My game, my rules
When unarmed and unarmoured, you count as a large gang when defending against gunfire and a medium gang against melee weapons (except bare fists).  This goes down to medium and small respectively if you're wielding a melee weapon.  In addition, your bare fists do area AP damage.

The Truth in these two fists of mine
When you go aggro on someone in melee, you can not only change what people do, but also what they believe.  This needs to be a fundamental truth, such as 'it's better to be loved than feared', and  you need to believe it to be true yourself.

Physical communication
When studying someone fight using their full strength and cunning (i.e. not a gunfight), against you or someone else, you can roll +Hard to Read a Person and ask questions without any verbal interaction.  In addition to the usual questions, you may also ask 'Why do you fight?'.

At one with the world
When meditating peacefully, you gain augury with your own body as an antenna.

A new beginning
When improving one or more people's lot in life in a significant manner, or giving someone a new start, perspective or direction in life, in a significant and fundamental way, mark XP.

Finishing old business
When your harm clock goes to 12:00, instead of dying, clear the clock back to 0:00 (ignoring any remaining damage), but when the current confrontation is over (which may or may not be more than just the current fight), you walk off into the sunset, never to be seen again.

Unbreakable
You gain XP when you take a debility.  In addition, once per session, for one scene, you may ignore the effect of any debilities you have.


Honestly, I'm more than half tempted to move 'Finishing old business' and 'Unbreakable' to the 'cool stuff inherent to the character' area, equivalent to the Touchstone's 'go among the people' stuff, but I'll leave them where they are for now.

Fundamentally, this character is designed to appear, get up in everyone's business, destroy all the status quos, then wander off into the sunset.  Let me know your thoughts.

52
Monsterhearts / Re: New skin: the Mummy
« on: April 24, 2012, 08:11:45 PM »
Not bad, but I had a few comments.  I hope they make sense.

Unswerving support: I could be wrong, it's too late to check the rules now, but I believe that, unlike Apocalypse World, acting as a gang doesn't mean anything in Monsterhearts.  I think you mean 'act at an advantage'.

Veiled Eyes: to a casual glance, this looks identical to a mortal move.  Bad form.  I understand why it's there, but it should be different in a way that emphasizes the difference in the relationship between a mummy and a mortal.

Consecrated temple seems a little weak.  Rather than a +1, I think it might be better if it let you do something you can't usually do when gazing into the abyss.  No ideas at the moment (it's late here.  Maybe later.), but the thought's there.

Name Magic: do you mean 'it's not mandatory to see your target, but if you can't, you need to spend an extra string to use the power'?
Also: I disapprove of being able to use tokens here.  It features no-where else in the playbook, is taken from another playbook and generally is unnecessary.

Darkest self: simply terrible.  The Darkest Self is when the safety lights go off and the character becomes a true monster.  In this DS, they lie down for a nap.  Definitely, definitely, go with the version where they feed off the life force of others to sustain themselves.  Perhaps exit the darkest self when you transfer your lover's soul to a more deserving host?

Anyway, those are just my thoughts.  Hope they help.

53
Monsterhearts / Re: Rule Clarifications
« on: April 03, 2012, 07:02:31 PM »
I think if I were to run a game with the Serpentine in (and I don't know if I'll get my group to want a game at all at this point), I'd probably personally remove the part of The Big Reveal where the person you reveal yourself to gets a string.  I understand why it's there.  It makes sense being there.  But it makes the move too weak.  Without it, when you reveal yourself, you either get acceptance (narrative success) or +1 forward (mechanical success).  For me, personally, that's a good balance of flavour and effectiveness.

And thanks again, this has been really helpful.

54
Monsterhearts / Re: Rule Clarifications
« on: April 03, 2012, 08:28:44 AM »
Quote from: mcdaldno on April 03, 2012, 01:19:43 AM
Quote from: SoylentWhite on April 02, 2012, 07:06:39 PM
3) Chosen's sex move.  Example: Hailey the Chosen PC has previously slept with another girl's guy and got the condition 'Homewrecker'.  She now successfully seduces another girl's boyfriend . . . and loses the 'homewrecker' condition?  Naturally, this is an extreme example, but it seems counter-intuitive.  I can understand it for physical conditions, but not social ones.  Am I missing something?

You're not missing anything. The Chosen's sex move is about using sex as a crutch, and self-judgment. When The Chosen has sex, it doesn't necessarily mean that she has stopped being a "homewrecker," but it does mean that she's moved past the point of letting people hold power over her for being one. When The Chosen has sex, all the other bullshit gets flushed, but maybe she feels a new source of shame as a result.

If you'd like an example of this in action, it happens almost every episode in Season 6 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Buffy is burdened with a lot of Conditions - resurrected, unstable, moody, etc. She keeps on sleeping with Spike to try and make her problems go away. And they sort of do. She uses sex as a crutch. But as a result, Spike continues to gain power over her, and traps her in a pathological relationship.

That's a very useful answer, the line 'When The Chosen has sex, it doesn't necessarily mean that she has stopped being a "homewrecker," but it does mean that she's moved past the point of letting people hold power over her for being one.' especially made it 'click' in my head.

Quote from: mcdaldno on April 03, 2012, 01:19:43 AM
Quote from: SoylentWhite on April 02, 2012, 07:06:39 PM
7) Ghoul's darkest self.  To get out of it, they need to be restrained or fended off for 30-40 minutes.  But say they turned to their darkest self by having sex with a Mortal, and the ghoul is their true love.  The nearest hunger would naturally be sex with the Mortal.  Being their true love, they are unlikely to be restrained or fended off.  So what happens?  Can the ghoul regain their composure while feeding?  (Would they then just re-enter their darkest self shortly thereafter again, in an infinite loop?)  Would they have sex until one partner or the other is incapable, then move on to the next hunger?

The best answer is: this is a situation where you need to follow your MC Principles, ask lots of questions, and keep the story feral. The mechanics will never be the whole picture, because Monsterhearts is about the stories people tell within those mechanics.

So: The Ghoul goes into their Darkest Self, and their nearest Hunger is sexual. Ask The Ghoul, "What do you do?" When they answer, ask The Mortal, "What do you do?" Keeping asking those questions, and keeping calling for people to make moves where appropriate.

It's probably unlikely that these two characters would get caught in an endless, hungry sex loop. But (and I can't help but giggle here) such a thing isn't unprecedented in the genre! In Buffy S4-E18 ("Where the Wild Things Are"), Buffy and Riley get caught in an endless, exhausting, cosmically-binding sex loop. Unkind spirits keep them locked in perpetual sex until their friends come to the rescue. So, uh, you know: whatever happens, happens.

But really: the Ghoul satiates its sexual hunger, and remains its Darkest Self. It's totally fine for them to then run off and satiate one of their other hungers, or for them to just keep gorging themselves on that one single hunger. If they choose to stay around and gorge, then you still need to uphold your agendas, especially: Make the PC's lives not boring; Keep the story feral. That means introducing new situations.

Useful, thanks.

Quote from: mcdaldno on April 03, 2012, 01:19:43 AM
Quote from: SoylentWhite on April 02, 2012, 07:06:39 PM
9) Hypnotic.  Does this work against PCs (I would assume not, but it doesn't say)?  If so, what effect would 'unhinged' have?  A simple condition?

Yeah, this move works on PCs, which is why it's scary.

Giving them the "unhinged" Condition is definitely appropriate. Furthermore, take the opportunity to frame them into really "unhinged" scenes until they get rid of that Condition. Like, start a scene off with, "You're still unhinged, right? So, you wake up on the golf course putting greens, naked, a dead mouse held limp in your right hand."

Nice!

Quote from: mcdaldno on April 03, 2012, 01:19:43 AM
Quote from: SoylentWhite on April 02, 2012, 07:06:39 PM
5) Ending (Ghoul move).  What?  I'm not sure I understand it.  It looks utterly useless.  You can give someone a specific condition, then make a roll without any bonuses.  Why would you take this?

You can immediately tag morbid in turning them on, which gives you +1 (just like any other Condition would). Ending lets you seduce people by saying creepy, macabre things about how you died. Morbid is the +1 bonus here (with the added benefit that it sticks around, until they figure out how to get rid of it).

Quote
10) Similar to 'Ending', I'm confused as to why anyone would take 'The Big Reveal' (Serpentine).  Once per character, you can give them a string against you, and the choice of gaining XP or giving you 1 forward against them. The only thing I can see is if these moves are 'acceptance moves'.  In other words, if these moves break the standard MC rule of 'accept conditionally', and allow a much less conditional acceptance (much the same as the 12+ hot move in AW).  If that is the case however, it needs to be signposted much better.

Ending and The Big Reveal are very different moves. Ending is about getting +1 to turning someone on, and sticking them with a Condition at the same time.

The Big Reveal is three things at once: an acceptance move, an awesome situation generator, and a way to carry forward against lots of people (because you can totally use it on NPCs, why not?).

The thing is, this move isn't "if they agree to accept you" or "if they say they accept you." If they want to avoid the stick, they need to accept you. And to do it, do it. A cunning player is going to find lots of applications for that. Like, Attor is failing Chemistry. So Attor approaches his Chemistry teacher after class, and reveals his true form. "It's so hard," says Attor, "trying to fit in with you humans. I'm doing the best I can.

When you use it with an NPC, they obviously can't mark experience for accepting you.... but you can still carry forward against them if they reject you.

I linked these two as being similar in that they both involved revealing something about themself and they both seemed to lack teeth mechanically, rather than implying they both covered the same ground.

But the example you gave for The Big Reveal really threw me.  I saw it as a move you'd use on someone you had some kind of vaguely trusting relationship with.  Revealing yourself as a monster to a human teacher because you're failing the class then using the inevitable +1 forward (since anyone normal would freak out under those circumstances) to manipulate them into giving you better grades was something I'd never have considered.  Basically, I saw it solely as a move where the goal is to get accepted, rather than one where you'd deliberately choose to be rejected in order to exchange a string for 1 forward.  Still not sure it's mechanically *worth* it, but at least I can see it as a cool move now.


And sure, I get the whole 'story first' thing (I did note The Big Reveal as a narrative 'acceptance move', after all).  But the mechanics help drive that, so I like to have as firm a grasp of them as I can.  And since I can ask, I thought I would (and even after all these years, I still totally think it's cool that when there are mechanical queries, I can just pop online and ask the author.  To my mind it's one of the awesome things about this hobby.)

Thanks for all the help!

55
Monsterhearts / Rule Clarifications
« on: April 02, 2012, 07:06:39 PM »
Love the book, but there are a few things I'm unclear on, thought I might as well ask.  Had a quick look, didn't see answers obviously elsewhere.  Note: all examples are hypothetical.

1) Example situation: Toni is looking to sneak through town to meet with her secret boyfriend.  Although she doesn't know she's being followed, she takes precautions to lose any tail, not involving running away.  Guy is trying to follow her.  Both are PCs.
What would be a/the right way of handling this?  It's not 'running away' to my eye.  A custom Cold move might make sense, but which of Toni or Guy would roll, given that interfering is much harder in this than pure AW?

2) Lash out physically.  There is the option of them needing to hold steady before retaliating.  I presume this option is only valid vs PCs, or can this be used vs NPCs, with much the same effect as spending a string to make them hesitate?

3) Chosen's sex move.  Example: Hailey the Chosen PC has previously slept with another girl's guy and got the condition 'Homewrecker'.  She now successfully seduces another girl's boyfriend . . . and loses the 'homewrecker' condition?  Naturally, this is an extreme example, but it seems counter-intuitive.  I can understand it for physical conditions, but not social ones.  Am I missing something?

4) Short rest for the wicked.  Does 'fully healed' include being healed of all physical conditions?

5) Ending (Ghoul move).  What?  I'm not sure I understand it.  It looks utterly useless.  You can give someone a specific condition, then make a roll without any bonuses.  Why would you take this?

6) Ghoul's sex move: If the ghoul has sex with person A and gains the 'Have sex with person A' hunger, then has sex with person B, I assume the 'Have sex with person B' hunger replaces the former?  Or is it exactly as written and there is a separate hunger for each?

7) Ghoul's darkest self.  To get out of it, they need to be restrained or fended off for 30-40 minutes.  But say they turned to their darkest self by having sex with a Mortal, and the ghoul is their true love.  The nearest hunger would naturally be sex with the Mortal.  Being their true love, they are unlikely to be restrained or fended off.  So what happens?  Can the ghoul regain their composure while feeding?  (Would they then just re-enter their darkest self shortly thereafter again, in an infinite loop?)  Would they have sex until one partner or the other is incapable, then move on to the next hunger?

8) Chosen sex move clears conditions.  Queen sex move gives a condition.  Which one takes precedence should a Chosen and Queen have sex?

9) Hypnotic.  Does this work against PCs (I would assume not, but it doesn't say)?  If so, what effect would 'unhinged' have?  A simple condition?

10) Similar to 'Ending', I'm confused as to why anyone would take 'The Big Reveal' (Serpentine).  Once per character, you can give them a string against you, and the choice of gaining XP or giving you 1 forward against them.
The only thing I can see is if these moves are 'acceptance moves'.  In other words, if these moves break the standard MC rule of 'accept conditionally', and allow a much less conditional acceptance (much the same as the 12+ hot move in AW).  If that is the case however, it needs to be signposted much better.

That's it for now.  Hopefully these questions aren't too stupid.  It's late and I could easily have missed something obvious.

56
Apocalypse World / Re: New Playbook: The Abacus
« on: January 17, 2012, 07:46:53 AM »
Thorough *makes sense*, but if you have tortured someone and then let them go, I think you'll need a *very* good reason for them not to dedicate their life to ending yours.  And then they'll just dedicate their lives to getting around the reason.  Not only for revenge, but also you know too much about them.

Does the boss have to be unlikable?  I mean, quite a few PCs will be out for #1, so a boss interested in having a communistic hardhold, where everyone is equal and life is fair (in theory) is likely to be a serious threat without being unlikable.

But I see no problem with the character being set up with a black hat.  I don't quite agree with it, but I read somewhere (on these forums, I think) someone opine that all of the core playbooks were Lawful Evil on the D&D scale, apart from Battlebabes who were Chaotic Evil. 

And I got what you were going for with the sex move, but I wanted to purely cover the mechanical direction of force.  Narrative direction comes mostly from the player, after all.

57
Apocalypse World / Re: New Playbook: The Abacus
« on: January 16, 2012, 08:06:46 AM »
While waiting for boss rules, I think it might be helpful to go over the moves one by one and see what behaviour each one promotes in the character.  Then we can see if that's what you want them to be doing.

Making it count - any time you inflict at least 2-harm, you can choose to also cause some lasting pain or break something important.

This makes them a nuclear weapon.  Not in the sense that they can kill anything, but the political deterrant factor - you may kill them, but unless you do so with overwhelming force, they will cripple you in return.  Therefore this encourages other people to avoid engaging the abacus and for the abacus to throw his weight around, since no-one will want to take him down.


Thorough - any time you take the time or effort to really hurt someone take time or effort to closely observe someone seriously hurt, roll +cool. On a 10+, hold 3. On a 7-9, hold 1. Spend your hold 1-for-1 to ask questions:
* What weakness does your body exhibit?
* What are you hiding from people you trust?
* What would you die for?
* What do you usually do to dull the pain?

Once you've tortured someone, you don't tend to let them live to get revenge (and none of the questions, bar maybe 'what are you hiding' cover stuff still useful post-mortem), so this mostly encourages studying those that are already wounded.  Once you've done that, it encourages a manipulative social game, using their weaknesses to get them to do what you want.
It should be noticed, that with 'read a person' advanced, this becomes less useful (though not useless, 12+ rolls aren't that common, even with +3).


Like a ghost - when you appear from nowhere to inflict violence, roll +cool. On a 10+, you get your shot off before getting spotted and inflict harm as appropriate. On a 7-9, one of them notices you - either hightail it or trade fire.

Encourages a very hit-and-run style of fighting.  Also adds to the deterrant factor of 'Making it count', since a victim can't even use their gang for protection.


Aware - roll +cool instead of +weird to open your brain.

Encourages more brain-opening.  Always good.


Bloodhound - all you need to read a person is something personal of theirs, they don't need to be near you.

The 'read a person' questions are:
is your character telling the truth? - N/A (not saying anything - they're not there)
what’s your character really feeling? - N/A, unless you go for a general 'mood of the day', which is less useful (but not useless in some circumstances)
what does your character intend to do? - makes you act more informedly.
what does your character wish I’d do? - ditto.
how could I get your character to __? - and again.
So, basically, the 3 bottom questions are much more applicable/useful in this circumstance, and they all help the abacus be more informed about circumstances and act knowledgeably.


Lethal - whether using a weapon or not, always inflict at least Cool-harm, before armour. If there's a weakspot you know of, ignore that armour and do ap-harm instead.

Only attack an opponent you've researched.  Be un/underarmed so as to appear less threatening without significantly affecting your lethality.


Special move:
When you have sex, you lose your control. Your partner can have you wake up anyplace they want, good or bad.

Only have sex with someone you really, really trust.  Even then, only maybe.  In other words, don't have sex.
Of course, if you want to get to a secret moonbase, this is a good way . . . (j/k)


Are those the behaviours you wanted?  Are they consistent with the fluff?

58
Apocalypse World / Re: New Playbook: The Abacus
« on: January 11, 2012, 08:06:55 AM »
Quote from: DWeird on January 10, 2012, 06:25:13 PM
Violence can be fairly easily forgotten after it happens in AW, but a run in with an Abacus leaves scars.
The Abacus is the rust monster of Apocalypse world.  Always hated those gits.

I like Bloodhound.  (The move, not the name.)

The problem with problem solver is that 1 barter is not an inconsiderable amount of money.  It's a month's reasonable living expenses.  Being able to make money from 'nothing' (effectively) makes sense for a Hardholder with the resources of the hardhold available, less so here.
Plus, I don't find barter or getting paid interesting.  Oftener right encourages something that perhaps characters wouldn't do otherwise (ask for help).  But paying poeple for work is something they'd do already.  It doesn't add anything to the narrative.  You seem to have dismissed my 'putting forward a plan' move as an alternative, and I don't have anything better to put forward yet.  Maybe later.

59
Apocalypse World / Re: New Playbook: The Abacus
« on: January 10, 2012, 03:19:10 PM »
Right.  Objection to lethal removed, then.  But I feel it's important to just add the note '(before armour)' to the description.  It's ambiguous otherwise, and makes a *huge* difference.

Also, now happy with 'Like a Ghost'.  No further changes suggested.

Eye for Detail, aside from the mechanical problems, seems opposed to your 'has difficulty getting people to do what he wants' concept, since that's exactly what it's used for.

You still need a replacement for Tools of the trade.  So, what did you think of my two rough move ideas?  Any good?

Still chewing on 'Thorough'.

60
Apocalypse World / Re: New Playbook: The Abacus
« on: January 10, 2012, 08:07:49 AM »
Not my argument, but I would point out that yes, read a *sitch* gives +1, read a person just gives info.

Updated Like a Ghost: massive improvement thematically.  I stand by my assessment that straight-up fighting is the gunlugger's domain.  This really demonstrates the difference between their styles.
Unfortunately, I fail to see what this move allows that 'act under fire' doesn't.  The only difference this move seems to make is to say 'if you don't have this move, you can't ambush', which is silly.

The way I read lethal (but I fully appreciate that there are 2 ways of doing so) is 'Abacus (with 3 Cool) stabs using a knife (2-harm) person B.  Person B has 1-armour.  Therefore, Abacus inflicts 1-harm, upgraded to 3 by Lethal.'
I fully admit my views are biased by having played a gunlugger with an AP assault rifle, but that is truly monstrous, and pushes the character up to the battlefield effectiveness of a Gunlugger, as well as them having other schticks.  And, to my mind, it shouldn't.  Gunluggers are about being the kings of the battlefield, abacuses (abaci?) are about solving problems through whatever means necessary (correct me if my interpretation is wrong).
I should point out that I do really like the 'if you know a weakspot, do AP' part of the move - that really plays up the 'uses knowledge and planning to fight' part of the character.

'Thorough', to me, is like looking up at the sky on an overcast day.  There's 'something' (the sun/a good idea) there, I just can't quite see it clearly at the moment.

I think my problem is conceptual.  Looking at the playbooks, consider their concept and domain.  It's *tight*.  Each has a definite area.  Everything ties into that, and each is distinct.
This, I like the concept as I read it, and some of the moves tie into it really well, but there is fat that needs trimming (as you've started to do, with removing 'Tools') and you've really only focused on one part of the concept - killing.
I don't want to hijack your playbook, so feel free to ignore this, but a defining feature of this concept is he has a boss, so where's the move 'when trying to convince someone to follow a plan of yours, roll +cool instead of +hot (or +Hx for PCs, and they gain XP if they do on a hit),' or anything along those lines?
If you want to go wilder, there's the possibility of 'when you have information and time, you can treat a threat(/front?) as a person and read them.'
I haven't balanced/thought these ideas through.  But for my understanding of the concept, more non-combat-specific moves are what is required to make it more consistent between fluff & crunch.  You may disagree.  But those are my thoughts at the moment.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5