Nice! Did you just use the same technique as Vincent's playbook portraits?

I think the worn/hurt and refresh scene thing will work really well in an AW hack (without having tried it, obviously). As you develop it, I'd add some slightly more specific choices to the moves (not super specific, just like the way act under fire has "offer a hard bargain, a worse outcome, or an ugly choice"). As it is "the MC will tell you the consequences" doesn't give the MC much in the way of inspiration, and having every move that way takes away some opportunities for tough but interesting player choices. Are powers gonna just be moves?

What I mean is, say someone pushes a move in answer to a provocative MC question. Then the MC asks a deeper question (revolving around the same issue) of another player character, effectively inviting someone else's vision of AW into the mix.

Workable?

Definitely! This is a super fantastic way to build PC-NPC-PC triangles and otherwise entangle the PCs in the same issues. Remember that most holds are gonna be pretty small places, and the players are all 'colleagues' at least, and know each other, so when something is important to one PC, it's quite likely that it's important in the same or a different way to another PC. If I'm understanding your question right, at least.

And as to your OP, yeah, I can't really think of specific questions to suggest, other than the standby of "I dunno, where/why/how *do* you do that?" when someone asks you a question about the world. A nice variation of this technique is to spit out a detail of your own, but then ask for more from the player. Something like if someone says "What do they use for barter around here?" and you say "Most folks use hubcaps, because it's built on an old junk yard. Do you roll with that, or do you have something else valuable?"

Oh, and as a final point, I think Vincent mentioned in another thread that, yeah, you as MC still have editorial authority over contributions from players. So if you're like "what do you eat around here?" and somebody says "as much delicious, healthy food as we want because there's more than enough to go around!" you can go "uh, maybe not so fast". But you'll be surprised at the cool stuff your players will come up with and how it will interact with what you already have vague notions of. It's fun to "find out" about stuff you'd normally have to make up on your own (and still get to make up the stuff you want to :) ).

My only teensy quibble is that "Virility" specifically means "manliness", and so seems like not the best word for hotness for either sex. Hmmm, maybe "Unnatural Lust Transfixion"? Oh wait :)

Seriously, though, maybe "Dark Allure" or "Sensuality Charm" or something? Virility does sound cool and tap into a feeling of raw sexual allure due to *power* of some sort, I'm just trying to think of the right word to convey that for the ladies as well as the guys.

Ummm, if you're looking for a compromise solution of sorts, you could just make belts of ammo some gear acquired by barter/fiction/whatever that temporarily switch the tag to area.

For what it's worth, from a "real life simulating, rahr" standpoint, belt fed machine guns still burn through those belts pretty fast if you just hold down the trigger and go nuts spraying an area (not to mention overheating the barrel). I only bring that up as a further option for "activate their stuff's downsides", not because I'm against Rambo style machine gun mayhem.

This is great! I especially like your "getting stuck in" for handling brawls.

Dakka Dakka
Roll +cunnin when you’re in a gunfight. On a 10+ choose 2. On a 7-9 choose 1.
- They get shot up. Inflict +1harm.
- They gotta keep their heads down and hide behind cover.
- You’re dead-eyed. Inflict harm on a specific target of your choice.

I’m Da Biggest
Roll +brutal when you’re trying to get your way. Against NPCs, on a 10+ they do as you say. On a 7-9 they do as you say but MC chooses one:
- They need a thumpin’. Inflict harm on each other as established. If you would kill them, you can optionally choose to inflict no harm on each other and they are terrorized into doing what you say as though you rolled a +10.
- It won’t be cheap. You need to pay ‘em 1-teef.
- Yeah but it ain’t wot Zadgul wants me doin’, ‘n he’s bigga. ‘E’s not gonna like dis.

Here are my only concerns: Do you only use dakka dakka when shooting at another gang/mob? Cos if that's the move for shooting at even a single guy, that makes the last option to pick a specific target a non-choice in that case. I really do like that you're just blazing away at the group by default, though.

For I'm Da Biggest, "They need a thumpin'" is awesome, except that it seems like being able to inflict enough harm to kill them is a guaranteed 10+ every time. Maybe that's what you want since Orks are pretty freaking violent and genetically engineered to listen to the ones best able to kill them and all. But it might make it a more interesting trade off if it read "If you would inflict enough harm to kill them, you can choose to terrorize them into doing your bidding. You get the effects of a 10+, inflict no harm, but still take harm as established from them."

In other words, you're pulling your punches, but he sure isn't.

Are you planning on coming up with some more detailed driving/fighting from vehicles rules or moves, or do you think the existing ones'll do ya?

Simon, very thought provoking stuff! I'm processing that, but at first glance those three criteria seem useful and interesting. Sorry I don't have anything constructive to say just yet.

Enthusiasm! I just started watching Buffy for the first time, and that's taken my interest from "this sounds like a neat hack" to "hey, that totally works!" (still no love for Twilight from this guy, though, sorry).

Oh, also, good luck with the new place and whatever your new arrangements are.