Well, this'll basically be my online "notebook" to track my ideas on this project. So here we go.

It appears that each Skin has about 6 or 7 moves to choose from. I haven't exactly figured out when a Skin that has a mandatory move (Fae, Ghost, Ghoul, Infernal, Mortal, Queen, Witch) should allow the player to choose one or two other moves. I'm guessing that when the mandatory move either screws you over or really captures the nature of the Skin, the player would get to choose two other moves. But that's just speculation on my part.

I'm wondering because I feel to capture the nature of the vampires in V:tR, each clan Skin book should have the vampire's The Feeding move as a mandatory selection. Some myths present the vampire feeding on other things, but the background of V:tR describes them as only being able to survive on blood. Plus the move is just so awesome and generates all kinds of player choice and consequences.

I plan to steal moves from the existing Skins wherever possible to create the moves for the five clans. But I'm not going to try and shoehorn in moves that don't fit the flavor of the clan just because they exist. I'll have to create some custom moves. Which is fine with me as I love to tinker with stuff. Yeah.

For me it boils done to "Can you Defend yourself"?

If you can, then you can always defend against an attack directed at you, possibly causing more damage than if you reacted with a Hack and Slash...

I think the last paragraph of my post still applies, even if you can Defend yourself. But I'll do another narrative just to clarify.

GM: The Cave Troll hefts his club high into the air, ready to bring it crashing down onto your head. What do you do?
Fighter: I raise my shield to deflect the blow!
GM: So you're Defending... yourself? Uhn... OK. Roll+CON.
Fighter: [Rolls] That's an 11, so I get 3 hold. The Troll's club smashes into my shield, but I turn it lessening the impact. At the same time I bring my sword up and drive it into the shoulder gap it's outstretched arm creates.
GM: So that's half damage and damage equal to your level?
Fighter: Yup. And I have 1 hold left. Lets spend it to give an ally +1 forward.
GM: OK. The Troll's blow smashes you to your knees (take half damage) but your sword pierces it's flesh and drives deep into it's rib cage. It takes X damage.

So again, if you *can* stand in defense of yourself, the best outcome you can get is dealing your level damage (plus any bonuses) to the monster, taking half of the monster's damage, and giving an ally +1 forward against that particular monster. But you'll have spent all 3 of your hold.

If you respond with Hack & Slash the best outcome you can get is dealing your damage (plus any bonuses), and avoiding the attack from the monster. If the player is willing to take damage every time they use the Defend move, I don't think it's a problem that they'll always deal their level damage to the monster.

Once the Fighter hits 5th level if they Hack & Slash in response to a monster's attack, there's a 40% chance they'll do less than 5 damage, a 10% chance they'll do 5 damage, and a 50% chance they'll do more than 5 damage. You still have a 50/50 chance of doing more damage if you go for the Hack & Slash response, which is still fairly good odds.

As the Fighter goes up in levels, the chance for them to do more than their level damage with the Hack & Slash move decreases. At 10th level, they'll *always* do 10 damage if they go with the Defend move. But they'll also *always* be taking half of the monster's damage in return. And I imagine that even half damage from a monster that a 10th level character is facing is going to sting. If you think about it, two 10+ Defend moves means you take damage equivalent to a full monster attack (half damage + half damage = full damage). Two 10+ Hack & Slash moves have the potential of you dealing less damage, but guarantee that you take absolutely no damage from the monster.

I'm totally OK with a character doing more damage on a Defend but taking damage in the process. I think it's also worth pointing out that the holds gained from the Defend move don't stack. If you have 1 hold left from a previous Defend and then roll a 10+, I'm pretty sure you *don't* have 4 hold but still only have 3 hold. The Defend move says "you hold 3" and not "you hold +3".

Here's how I see it. The first sentence of the Defend Move reads:

When you stand in defense of a person, item, or location under attack, roll+CON.

The italics are my emphasis. If I were GM, I wouldn't let a player defend someone or something unless or until that thing came under attack or it was blatantly obvious that person or thing was going to be under attack in very short order.

GM: The Cave Troll hefts his club high into the air, ready to bring it crashing down onto the Halfling Thief. What do you do?
Fighter: I leap in front of the brute, raising my shield to deflect the blow!
GM: So you're Defending the Thief, then? OK. Roll+CON.

I would also only allow the character to continue the Defend Move if they don't take any offensive action. The third sentence of Defend starts:

So long as you stand in defense, when you or the thing you defend is attacked...

Again, the italic emphasis is mine. In my opinion, as soon as the character makes an offensive move (small "m" here), they'll lose any unspent hold they have from the Defend Move. If they want to protect someone or something again, they'll have to narrate the action, giving a fictional context to the Move. They'll also have to roll+CON again. Even if they're defending the same thing.

Fighter: [Rolls] That's an 11, so I get 3 hold. The Troll's club smashes into my shield, but I turn it lessening the impact. At the same time I bring my sword up and drive it into the shoulder gap it's outstretched arm creates.
GM: So that's half damage and damage equal to your level?
Fighter: Uhn, wait. That's redirect the attack to me, and half damage. So the hit I landed on the Troll is only cosmetic damage I guess. I have 1 hold left.
GM: The Troll bellows are reels backwards a few steps. He looks at the blood trickling down his arm and roars at you. Spittle sizzles as it strikes your dented shield. What do you do?
Fighter: I rush forward to finish the brute and...
GM: Hold on. So you're abandoning your defensive position? You're going offensive now, and you'll lose that 1 hold if you do. Is that OK?

As iserith said, the Defend Move is pretty useless if the person or thing you're defending doesn't get attacked. I mean, it'd be a total dick move for the GM to have the monsters ignore a defending character just to make the player waste their holds, but if nothing comes after the target of the Defend Move, that's what will happen. As soon as the character doesn't meet the "stand in defense" requirement of the move, the holds disappear.

And yes, high level characters have the potential to do more damage with the "damage equal to your level" option of the Defend Move than with their base damage. A 7th level Fighter will always deal 7 damage instead of rolling a d10. But a 10+ on Hack & Slash allows you to deal you damage and avoid taking damage. Contrast that with the 10+ on Defend. If you only take the "deal level damage" option, either you or the thing you were defending gets hit for the monster's full damage. That could possibly kill or destroy the thing you were attempting to defend in the first place. If you take the "redirect to yourself" and "deal level damage" option, then you're taking the full brunt of the monster's attack with no way to avoid it. If you spend all 3 hold at once to take the "redirect", "half damage" and "deal level damage" then you're still taking half damage and you've used up all your hold, forcing you to roll+CON again for your next move if you want to continue to defend.

So the best outcome of Hack & Slash is damage to the monster and none to you. The best outcome for Defend is damage to the monster and half it's damage to you. But the thing you were defending doesn't take any damage at all, which was the whole point of defending it in the first place.

Thanks for the clarification, mcdaldno. I'm one of those MCs/GMs who like to know exactly what the rules are before I ignore them and do my own thing. :)

Hey all. I don't mean to necro this thread, but I was just wondering if it's possible for PCs to give out Strings to NPCs during character creation. The post right above this one states that it's possible, but I was wondering if someone would be nice enough to direct me to a page number where this is clarified. Thanks.

All right. I think I've nailed down what the stats for my hack will be. I tried to boil them down to the fewest number possible but still ended up with five; Steady, Size, Shrewd, Swift, and Sense.

• Steady - as in constant, staunch, steadfast, sure, or not easily disturbed;
• Size - as in bulk, physical dimensions, mass, or full-bodied;
• Shrewd - as in clever, keen, perceptive, cunning, and wily;
• Swift - as in quick, brisk, rapid, fleet-footed, or possessing fast reflexes;
• Sense - as in be sensitive to, perceive, comprehend, or become conscious of.

Steady will be the stat added when using moves that relate to holding your ground, resisting your instincts, or standing up to someone or something. Kind of like an Act Under Fire move. Size will be the stat added when making moves meant to intimidate someone or to inflict harm on someone or something. Sort of like Go Aggro or Sieze By Force. Shrewd will be the stat added when using moves related to perception and detection, including the detection of lies and other character's motivations or conditions. Like Read A Sitch or Read A Person. Swift will be the stat added when using moves that relate to running, fleeing, and pursuing. This one doesn't have a counterpart in Apocalypse World. Animals do a lot of running; prey animals are constantly running from predators and other dangers, while predatory animals are chasing things down for food or sport. I definitely needed a stat to represent that, as I imagine chases and escapes will happen quite frequently in the game. It also needed to become a stat so that success or failure was determined impartially. Meaning with dice. Being a rabbit trying to outrun a dog or a wolf trying to run down an elk is too important and creates too much pressure if the MC has to make that decision all on their own. Sense will be the stat added when using moves that relate to gut feelings, premonitions, and other 6th sense type stuff. This could be simple instincts too. After all, animals often have senses beyond those of humans and are able to "know" when storms, fires, or other dangers are approaching. Additionally though, the source material (Richard Adam's books) all have "psychic" or "touched" characters who have visions, are able to predict the future, or pick up on feelings and emotions that other's can't. There's no psychic maelstrom in this hack; more an idea of being able to tap into the collective consciousness of the earth.

Next up, the Basic Moves.

So after my friends and I recorded our most recent podcast about animals in literature and how you can use them in your games (which you can listen to  here), I went back and listened to the Watership Down audio book again. Then I watched the Plague Dogs animated movie. I also listened to the interview Mr. Baker did on The Walking Eye podcast about Apocalypse World back in 2011, as well as their review of the game. Oh, and I'm finally running an AW game for my group.

All these things combined in my head over the weekend, and fueled by an abundance of coffee and boredom, they slowly solidified into the germ of an idea for an Apocalypse World  hack. I'm currently calling it Apocalypse Warrens for lack of a better title.

The premise of Apocalypse Warrens is that players would play as real animals in the real world; similar to the rabbits in Watership Down or the dogs in Plague Dogs. There may even be a touch of Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH in the idea as well. The characters would have their own personalities, language, mythology and beliefs, but also have all the limitations and abilities of real animals. Including a limited ability to comprehend the "human" world around them. The characters will not be the hind leg walking, tool manipulating, clothing wearing, armor making, sword wielding "animals" of the Brian Jaques Redwall book series;. Those aren't real animals; they're just people in animal costumes. Despite being considered children's books, both Watership Down and Plague Dogs are violent, bloody, and intense. The character's futures are unsure, just like in Apocalypse World.

I don't really have much in terms of concrete mechanical stuff at this point. It's still just a lot of ideas and images floating around in my head right now. I'm playing around with what the Basic Moves should be, as well as how many and what stats I'll need. I remember Mr. Baker saying that the first thing he does when thinking of a hack is to rewrite the MC's Agenda. He then refers to that during the creation process to keep things on theme. That much at least I have done.

MC's Agenda
- Present the world as it would be perceived by an animal.
- Make the player's character's lives unsure and dangerous.
- Play to see what happens.

I think that first one is the most important, which it why I put it first. Duh. Anyone who's familiar with Richard Adam's books knows that certain things are simply beyond the character's comprehension. The bulldozer that destroys the Sandleford warren in Watership Down is described as "a great yellow monster that buried it's head in the earth and ate up the ground"; the poison gas was "bad air that turned you silly". Humans are ultimately alien and unknowable to the animals in the books, much like the Great Old Ones or Elder Gods in an H.P. Lovecraft story. In Apocalypse Warrens it's going to be the MC's job to present and describe the world to the players as such.

I was originally going to do only rabbits, but have since expanded this. I'm now thinking about doing mice, rats and other rodents, dogs and similar animals (like wolves and foxes), horses and mules, and possibly birds. Maybe even big cats like lions (yes, I guess you could do The Lion King RPG if you really wanted to), and hyenas (which I know are their own species). You wouldn't have a "mixed party" of animals though (no wolves and rabbits in the same group), since their diet and behavior would be too different. Certain stats and Moves might even have to be different for the different species to reflect their behavior. For example, a rabbit or mouse could "Go To Ground" and hide but a horse couldn't. The different Playbooks would be based on skill sets or archetypes found in the books (Seer, Protector, Motivator, Grokker, etc.) and again there would probably have to be different ones for the different animals species, as not all of them will be appropriate. It doesn't make sense to have a Hunter or Stalker themed Playbook for herbivorous animals like horses and rabbits, now does it?

My (overly ambitious goal) is to eventually produce a stand alone book, similar to Joe McDaldno's Monsterhearts or Dungeon World. We'll see how far I get.

Thanks, David Jay. By all means, go ahead and steal my idea. I've been wanting to use Tarot cards in some capacity in an RPG for a while now, even more so after reading about the Oracles for In A Wicked Age… I did a seven card spread I found on the internet that is supposedly good for answering the question "What is to be done?" The seven cards determine: the past, the present, the future, what to do, outside influences, hopes/fears, and the final outcome.

I didn't include it in my initial post, but the card I pulled for the outside influences element was Strength in a reversed position; indicating weakness, sickness, and/or a lack of faith. I was originally thinking about putting some kind of bacteria in the water or having toxic fumes slowly leaking from the mine tunnels that sickened people. But your suggestion of a dissenting MC character who forms a rival faction is much more interesting, as the PCs can interact with it. The MC character is acting a bit like a sickness anyway; weakening the cohesion of the group by spreading a lack of faith in the hardholder's leadership among the population.

So that's actually four Threats I've got now, all inside the handhold, all hovering around the Fear/Ignorance scarcity; the hardholder and his crew (Brutes: Enforcers), the rival faction that'll spring up to oppose him (Warlord: Prophet), the twisted depths of the ruined mine shafts (Landscape: Prison or Maze), and the complacency/fear the general population starts to succumb to (Affliction: Delusion). Now I just need to create some count down clocks and maybe a Front to represent the weather conditions and situation outside the hardhold. Time to get cracking! Thanks.