How about :
When you engage a foe in melee, rolll +STR. By default, you deal your damage and your enemy succesfully attacks you. On a 7-9 choose 1 option, on 10+ choose 2.
-you deal extra damage (+1d6)
-you completely avoid your enemy's attack
-you knock down, disarm or overpower your enemy
-you end up where you wanted to be

See what I mean? See the difference?

I really like it Gregpogor!

Hi guys

Stras

Hey P2, quick Q.  You mention for the fighters you miss that they don't have a 'dual wield' move 'like the ranger'.

I note that they have 'Merciless' (which is mechanically the same, so you can flavor it however you wish) and the ability to multiclass and snag that the move for 2 weapons.

Would this cover what you're looking for, or are you hunting specifically a mention of two weapons? I'm just curious.

Hi Stras, Merciless is machanically the same as dual wield, yes, but we must remember that this is a game about fiction, Merciless give you more damage for being such violent or "fighting dirty", and that's why it doesn't stack with "Scent of Blood".

Sure I can say my players "you can treat Merciless as dual wiels", but it's a house rule, and it doesn't reflect well on the other fighters moves and his signature weapon.

Lets say I wish my fighter to be a dual wield one, but by the rules as writen, I only have one weapon with two enhancements. Sure I can house rule it to "you can have two signature weapon, and you can choose to apply the two enhancements in just one of then or one in each other, including two weapons with the same enhancement". But I'd like to see some official word on this, 'cause it reflects in other fighters moves too. And he'll be abandoning his shield (and thus reducing his total armor) to dual wield, favoring offence in detriment of defence.

Stras

As for the ranger - I do note that no class has actual additional mechanical benefits for using Volley (many tinker with Hack and Slash).  Might be a cool niche.

Ifryt

I wrote about it earlier: http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=2472.0
but here it comes again. I also think about the ranger more as a hunter - with an animal companion and bow tricks - not as a dual weapons wielding warrior. Please, give  us some ranged tricks for ranger.

I mentioned javelin too 'cause it's used for ranged huting, and it's very iconic a hunter hunting his prey by throwing his spear at it or shoting with his bow.
 
We both think ranger to be more a skirmisher than a slayer. Well, let's hope our prayers are heard =)

I think this is easiest answered in order.

Bard

1. A Port in the Storm - nobody in my group(s) is 100% sure what the point of this is. I mostly use it as a cue to describe new places, and maybe toss in a few leads/hooks.  I note that every time this is asked I promptly address the character and ask him something in the vein of 'who did you leave behind here?', 'who is your biggest fan here?' or 'who would not be happy to see you come strutting back into town?'.  I don't know if that's intended, or if it's something I personally as a GM always feel should be appended to the move.

I know it's not a move but I figure it bears mention here as it applies to numerous bard moves:

2. Theme.  From the description the bard is an orator, historian, teller of tales.  However most of their abilities are focused around their magic Art, with no exact explanation.  I can see how a bard can be more of a non-mystic general, or inspiring comrade (pick +1d4 forward on Art, use the new and improved 'It goes to 11' to buff, take some paladin moves via multi-class like Setup Strike and CHARGE!), but where does bardic magic come from?  Alot of the abilities ('Metal Hurlant', 'It goes to 11' mentions of 'righteous lute solos') are somewhat tongue in cheek.  I know this is a D&D staple (they ended up just ruling bardic magic sorcery), but there are very few cues in your (probably intentionaly) vague fiction to even provide a framework or guidance for some answers.

Finally someone thinks like me! =)

I'm working on a variant bard class for my house game, to reflect more to what I think bard is, and it's the class that I made most of changes.

Fighter

1.  It was mentioned here on the forums that the human racial was changing, I'd ask that you re-look at the elf one too (as fighters in general have +str moves, and Precise doesn't seem to favor them per se).  Aside from that, this is actually my favorite class.

It has style, it has power, it has flavor, even some flexibility.  No complaints/problems with any of the class moves.
[\quote]

I really like fighters too, they are great. The only thing I miss in they is that they don't have a move for dual wield like rangers (I even don't see why rangers are good two-weapon warriors, besides Drizzt existence. I see rangers as bow, javelin or beast masters, not as two-weapon fighters).

Quote

Ranger

Animal Companion: How do you as a GM deal with the beast, it being hurt, and healing.  Clearly this is a very potent element of the ranger, and should not be taken away willy-nilly, but is a hard move disabling the beastie or simply wounding it (similar to the ferocity reduction of Man's Best Friend)?

1. I wish 'Dual Wield' would be renamed 'Hunter's Eye' or 'Go for the throat' (or the eyes BOO!). Simply because Drizzt has scarred most of us and the class-based damage-die functions regardless of 'number of wield'.  Also both abilities are named 'Dual Wield' although the higher level one references Dual Strike (bug report!)
[\quote]

I wish hunters had more advanced moves for bows (and see my comment about dual wielding in fighter's part).

Quote

Thief

3. Some of the level arrangements seem odd.  There are 3 poison abilities in the 2-5 range and 1 in the 6-10 range.  So you can brew any poison you use, but they're always Dangerous unless you take a different advance.  Yet you can't plan a heist, as a thief, till level 6.  (...)  It just seems odd.

I have the same problems with poison moves too.

Quote

Wizard

This class is another one of my favorites. I love how the abilities make them more arcane and creepily inhuman (speak of things nobody else knows, with a touch pluck memories, and deflect attacks better by just having magic).

1. Does the elf 'cleric' spell only count for availability, or is it added to your spellbook?

2. Prepare Spells - can you prepare the same spell more than once?

3. Spell Augumentation - there are precisely 0 marked Ongoing (which is a keyword for the cleric) spells for the wizard.  How is this mitigated a bit since some mention 'ongoing' in the spell description, but don't use the tag like the single cleric spell that has it.  Can we be clear on what constitutes 'ongoing'?

Level 1 - Mention: Invis. Suspect: Telepathy?
Level 3 - Mention: Mimic. Suspect: Mirror Image?
Level 5 - Mention: Cage, Summon Monster.  Suspect: Polymorph?
Level 7 - Mention: Dominate, True Seeing.  Suspect: Contingency
Level 9 - Mention: Antipathy. Suspect: Shelter?

Some of these have alternate end conditions, but some have alternate end conditions but still mention Ongoing (ex Cage).  So far I've ruled that if the spell mentions ongoing in self-reference it counts, but I'd like an official word.

My problems with wizars are the two racial moves. I don't see why my elf wizards would get a Cleric's spell, or why my Human wizard would be more proeficient to summoning spells.

I have others questions about racial moves too, but them would get an intire new tread and I don't fell like arguing now... but I agree with everything you wrote in your op.

Not a bad idea, especially given it could apply to either damage taken or damage dealt.  The racial moves are all pretty old and are going to see an edit pass before the beta is done, for sure.  We've changed some core assumptions about the game and it behooves us to hit those again.

Nice to hear it. There are some racial moves that doesn't make sense to me, like human wizard. I'll verify the actual moves and give my suggestions for changes.

Also I would like to see races been more important, like a description and new moves or other options for racial moves.

Quote from: P2 on April 03, 2012, 10:46:08 AM

Btw, any new on beta 2.1?

Should be news.

Couldn't resist!

Lol =p

Cellphone keyboards sucks =p

Nice Idea Adam, I liked it.

Thanks for the very motivated answers guys, You all sold me the idea about my "lying complain".

That leads us to the problem: should bards be better to avoid the dangers of lying?

Are you including Jeremy's "Silver Tongue" move as an initial move or advanced?

Hi guys,

In the other topic I had complains about some Bard moves, in this, there are some about Ranger moves.

Wouldn't be a great time to get a new attention to the classes as all? Asking the players for specific playtest about the classes moves, giving report about unballanced things, or something we think is missing, or something we would like to change...

To start, I personnaly think that thieves don't need "poisoner" as an initial move. I see it as an advanced one. And I miss something in his initial moves, I don't know quite yet what is (I was foccusing in bards and wizards first), but I promisse I'll give every class an intense look to find this kind of things