Yes, it's supposed to be kind of like "fingers in every pie" for stuff that it is reasonable that one of your gang members could have found/liberated/requisitioned/stolen/extorted. It's more limited in scope but also more immediate in its application - if you get a hit you have the thing right now, you don't have to wait for it to show up.

Hello, everyone!

So, I am currently working on a PbtA hack that I'm very excited about, and I've already tried it out with a couple of friends. Next week I'm going to do my first full session with my usual group, and eventually I'd like to open up playtesting to others as well. In order to get the most useful feedback from playtesting, I'd like to distribute a survey of some kind, and I was wondering if anyone had any advice about how to come up with useful questions and prompts for playtesters.

How have you done it for your own games in the past? What worked and what didn't? Are there any existing resources on this topic that you could direct me to? I know what kinds of reactions/interactions I'm going for, but this is one case where I probably wouldn't want to use leading questions.

Munin has the right of it big time! Acting Under Fire is triggered by taking risks in the game's fiction, but it's actually a generally safer move than, say, Seizing By Force, especially when you have +3 Cool. Playing a Battlebabe entitles you to take audacious risks and, more often than not, come out the other side unscathed.

I would add that filling out details of the environment and explicitly providing the PCs with opportunities can be a good way to let the Battlebabe shine. I think that, for players who are accustomed to the combat of other game systems especially, they may not see themselves as having that many options. They're stuck in the mode of "Attack, attack, attack" one enemy at a time. That's not where the Battlebabe shines. It's when they come at people sideways and find ways to attack opponents that cannot readily fire back that they shine. If they're in a situation where they would have to Seize By Force, consider how they could Act Under Fire to turn that "Seize By Force" into a "Go Aggro"--and blur the line between "combat" and "negotiation" while they're at it.

But I get the feeling you already get that; the problem is that your players might not. That's why I say explicitly provide opportunities. While it might seem obvious to you based on your description of the scene that the hanging chain would let the Battlebabe swing behind the gang leader, it might not occur to your player. So, ask a leading question like "There's a chain hanging there, and if you swung on it you could get behind the gang boss--if you can avoid getting blasted into oblivion on the way down. Do you wanna?" These sorts of leading questions can help teach the game, communicating to the players the types of moves that are available to them. Then hopefully next time they'll start springing forth with ideas like that on their own.

The other side of the equation, though, is a little harder to address: motivation. The game sings when the player characters are highly motivated and really go for their drives. Unfortunately, the Battlebabe can sometimes appeal to players who just want to hang back, stay safe, and not care about anything. Getting a player like that invested and engaged enough to take action can be a challenge but not an insurmountable one when you meet them halfway.

Burned Over isn't about scarcity the way Apocalypse World is.

I'm new both to AW and Burned Over and planning to MC one of them sometime next year. What would you say Burned over is about?

It's a copy & paste error! The Vigilant doesn't start with devotion.

If they take the improvement, have them create their fallowing using the rules in the Monarch playbook.

-Vincent