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 - Guns_n_Droids

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6
brainstorming & development / Re: Fate points? In AW?
« on: October 28, 2011, 07:00:20 AM »
See, Mike, that's all good, but I fear that them not replenishing could be a bit of a problem if I want to run a long campaign(which I like to). It seems that I need to prepare for the moment of total Luck Loss as a "story comes to a big end", and I'm not sure I'd want this...
...Though, maybe, if in this big end they HAD, however slim, chance to save the world, survive, and get some of their luck back to go further... maybe, this could work.
BTW, remind me, in Monster of the Week, does everyone have the same amount of Luck on start? 'Cause in my case this is AW's hack towards RogueTrader, and in the original RT there's sorts of difference between characters, based both on "roll this stat", character building choices and natural inclination of certain classes to have a lot of fate points. I'm not sure in this case, should I drop the difference, or convert it somehow? (difference can be from 2 FP some fighters have to 5 FP for the leader himself)
I know that some of the MoW playbooks have an option to "regain" luck, while others have not, maybe I could use this...

brainstorming & development / Fate points? In AW?
« on: October 27, 2011, 04:37:47 AM »
So there's AW, and we love it. And there was those games, where we had "Fate points" or "Plot points" or smth like that, and it helped us when the roll was.. not quite as cool as we wanted.
Can we somehow include this into AW?
Easy at first sight, not so much in second, at least I'm not sure. AW has this quality which separates it from usual crunchy games: there're a lot LESS rolls in the game, so much less that we can give xp for just rolling a stat(you know that). Sometimes, if that's not battle, we can go for whole session with rolling no more than, say, 3-5-7 times.
So rolls are rare. And rolls are valued. Their outcome? Valued, too.
In traditional games we roll the whole time, so we can't always spend FP, we only save it for something crucial. in AW with, say, 2-3 FPs(per session) we can totally change the game's outcome
Solutions? Well, for now I see two. We can give flat bonuses - say, 3FP means not "3 rerolls", but "you can add +1 to result 3 times, either for one roll, or divided for several". Or we can use something like "1 FP reroll per CAMPAIGN", making it really special.
Or both.

Any other ideas, comments, smt like that?

P.S.: using "ark"-based 6 FPs and  making them roll +(FP left-3) can be interesting, I think

P.P.S. Monster of the week has 7 non-restorable "ignore wound or make this roll 12+ post-factum" luck points. Interesting idea. Any other?

Apocalypse World / Re: Operator questions
« on: October 27, 2011, 04:11:18 AM »
Thanks, Chroma, you've described all the choices pretty well, including what I'm asking. But as I'm always in the mood to ask for details, let's see into it more deep:

a) Maybe we indeed agree to play it onscreen.
So now my goal is: something went wrong, and PCs are in trouble. It is clear, that Operator choosing "catastrophe" of the "fight people" means that people should cause him and his crew trouble. I suppose that means that Operator shouldn't have a fair fight at all, he's screwed. And while he can win, he shouldn't "win and be cool about the whole deal".
Am I right here (meaning should I make the opposition bigger/meaner/better equipped and/or prepared?

b) mainly my problem is in "play offscreen"
Essentially, nothing changes from above situation, but I need to describe him being in the tight spot AND then describe how the whole deal worked out.
so okay, I can give him future badness(like, say, 'people paid for this crooks to be captured, yet you're here all beat up while they're at loose again') or take stuff, or whatever - and I still suppose that I need to give him some harm(as he WAS embattled, in the whole mess up front), more if he tried to fight back. That's the main question, as I'm not sure how much harm load into them - too low and they won't feel the failure, too much and both they'd be pissed and the game'd be stalled as well.

Apocalypse World / Re: Operator questions
« on: October 21, 2011, 03:12:55 PM »
So I found the answer on the first question(it's in the example right there in MC section after the embattled-and-other-things description. Yes, player makes the decision)

Second one is a bit harder even as I read "it is hard MC move" over and over - as in fact I'm collapsing all the fighting action into the single roll.

Apocalypse World / Re: What's a "charged interaction?"
« on: October 20, 2011, 06:23:28 PM »
I supposed to "read" somebody you'd have to talk with him for at least couple of minutes, so not "everytime", right? Or I did it wrong when I actually prevented player from rolling it when all he was doing was asking a question or two?

Apocalypse World / Operator questions
« on: October 20, 2011, 06:16:26 PM »
So I have one player as ..operator. And others are his crew, like, driver and his 'tank' car, battlebabe, gunlugger...
And he chooses his gigs on the session start. Protecting someone(caravans going through the area) as obligation and killings (3-barter/embattled) as paying.
And he rolls 8. So, one gig succeeds, one goes south.
1) Which one goes south? Or, to be more precise - who decides? No comments in book on this part, so I'm really not sure. It looks fun to let player decide, what he likes more - money for raider chief's head, or keeping his side of the deal and protecting the cargo in process. But anyway, I'd like a clear answer, not homerule.
2) okay, assuming player is honour-bound and chooses "I'm guarding caravan's retreat while embattled with the raiders". Question is: where do we go from here?
Book says that what supposed to be a clean job(e.g. Op made a good ambush point and made traps) turned out to be not so clean and they are pinned/trapped/whatever themselves.
And it also says that catastrophe is like any other move MC makes.
AND also it says that Op has right to say "this is not on screen, I just want the results".
So he don't have to play through the situation from "we're trapped, do something!" point.
So what happens? Hard move like I say "you were captured by raiders, yada-yada, go try pleading for freedom"? Or it's nothing so harsh and just "you're lucky to have a fast car, which is damaged by the way, or you'd be a corpse. Still, your injuries hurt nearly as much"? But how much damage and harm? I don't feel like just throwing "you all and a car get 3-harm each" kind of things, it feels sorts of stupid, as it's just random number of harm/damage.

Any advice appreciated, thanks!

Apocalypse World / Re: Hocus Followers/Surplus questions
« on: October 10, 2011, 03:46:53 AM »
IMO as read sitch can't be used more then one time before sitch changes, same is with this, more or less. Situation needs to change somehow(though in which way it needs to change depends on what are wants and surplus)

Apocalypse World / Re: Battle moves... without guns
« on: October 09, 2011, 07:13:55 AM »
I'm just trying to say, that killing a PC in one roll is sorta.. anticlimatic. Even a major NPCs in my opinion should take some time to kill just to, you know, give the feeling of importance.

Apocalypse World / Re: Battle moves... without guns
« on: October 08, 2011, 10:02:14 PM »
idea of basically "kill any kind of dude with one 10+" is wrong. I remind you why PC can take 2 bullets for "free". and that even weapons as deadly as chainsaw or machete don't have 6-harm. Also, I remind you of armor, which makes kinda hard to kill a dude(short of neck-breaking which is not easy) even with a weapon and in deadly combat

Apocalypse World / Rules questions[AW crowd control]
« on: October 07, 2011, 04:28:51 AM »
1) by brainer - I've seen somewhere idea about brain relay which was hanging on the telegraph pole to affect almost everyone around. Is it really supposed to work?
Should brainer be able to "go aggro" with his mind on a group of people? Does it depend on relay, or it's just how brainer does things? Will it be rollUnderFire before going aggro?(usual "problematic" modifyer)

2) by manipulate: same thing, trying to calm bunch of people and making them do what you want.

I'd really like to know how Lumpley wanted this to be, but other people's comments are appreciated as well

brainstorming & development / Re: Companions: Doctor Who with AW
« on: September 28, 2011, 07:57:15 PM »
and don't forget that almost each one of them inevitably became badass after a certain while, hunting Cybermen, becoming the Last Centurion...
For what I see, they always manage to remind the Doctor, how incredible and unique is each "ordinary" human, if you bother to look deep enough

brainstorming & development / Re: Companions: Doctor Who with AW
« on: September 28, 2011, 04:58:28 PM »
I mean Rory Williams. Or Mickey. Or this last one, Craig. I'd dare to say, that even Donna was not exactly the "Looker" kind, though YMMV.
Playbook I'd say should be something like "normal" book in "Monster of the Week" hack - someone who inherently didn't "get" the doctor, but who learned to cope with it.

brainstorming & development / Re: Companions: Doctor Who with AW
« on: September 28, 2011, 10:57:26 AM »
Nice! But you definitely need "Ordinary bloke", one who was nobody before he met the Doctor.
And an alien, for sure.

Apocalypse World / Re: Healing for NPCs
« on: September 24, 2011, 02:56:09 PM »
Sorry to dig the topic, but how you deal with NPC healing and jingle? And, as well, stock. If angel really uses his angel kit's stock on NPCs, then it should be fairly costly for a chopper to call for a patch-up job after some job gone wrong way(assuming chopper who cares about his boyz). Or it's supposed to be their jingle(which they get how much, interesting)? Or they're not too important, so stock should be spent only if they're dying, thus making NPC healing not too costly?

Apocalypse World / Re: Scarcity of atruism and reason
« on: September 24, 2011, 01:37:59 PM »
MC section tells us that it's "acceptable" to select someone who knows her worse then he did, and tell him to lower Hx by 1. In that case it resets from -4 to -1.

I don't get 3 things:
1) is it "additionally to telling someone to increase Hx" or is it "instead"?
2) while I get the idea of rewarding xp for knowing your fellow PCs better(it makes this inherent goal of the play, and it is logical in the post-apoc setting), I don't get, how you get xp for knowing someone way worse then you supposed?
3) saying that it can be 'metagamey' I mean that if I know that someone will try to screw with me doing X I'll better make it hard for him to interfere with my workings. Of course, he will get +Hx if I will try shooting at him, but if he's a gunlugger or battlebabe or so, and I'm angel or savvy, it's not a good idea anyway. Since he will kinda shoot back.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6