Probabilities and Balance

Maybe this will help make it a little clearer: In Michael's example, I read the initial bit as the GM making a move for whatever reason - probably just because everyone looked at him to see what happened, but maybe even due to a failed roll.

The GM establishes a fictional thing: The ogre's about to smash you! What do you do?

The player can't just ignore the established fiction and Hack and Slash. At the least he has to accept that an ogre just bashed him and take the consequences.

The ogre is doing something, to which the player may or may not react. After that, the player might do something like Hack and Slash. If the player gets a 7-9, that might mean that he's opened himself up to another attack from the ogre - uh oh!

If Michael's example didn't start with the ogre swinging, the player could Hack and Slash no problem. The defining characteristic is that we know, fictionally, that the ogre as a swing in motion to the fighter. If the fighter sucks it up it might play like this:

Player: (Thinks for a second, realizes that he has +1 forward now and would rather save it for the attack) "Whatever, I take it. I bring my shield up to deflect it while attack up under his defenses."

GM: "Okay, X damage as the tree trunk the ogre is wielding bounces off your shield. It sounds like you're Hack and Slashing then?"

Player: "Hell yeah! Dang, even with the +1 I got a 9. "

GM: "Well, you deal your damage, but the ogre gets in a strike too. You get in under his defenses sure enough, but after you slice him he flinches away and brings his knee up into you, X damage."



If the situation started differently, say with the ogre attacking someone else, it might play out like this:

GM: "The ogre smiles as he knocks you off your feet and you go sailing a few feet through the air, landing on your back against the edge of the cliff. The ogre starts moving towards you, smacking his club against his hand. Ajax, what are you doing while Omar is getting whalloped?"

Player: "The goblins are dead now, so I'm focusing on saving Omar. I step between him and the ogre and slash at the ogre's legs, try to make him less mobile."

GM: "Sounds like hack and slash to me."

@evilben

If the monster does something to somebody else, and the Fighter has the luxury of having the time to react with H&S, one of two things happens:

Either the monster takes a poke at the Fighter as it moves past, damaging him on a 7-9, or the monsters doesn't do any damage to the Fighter because it was intentionally ignoring him to get to the other PC, thus inflicting its "0 Damage" on a 7-9.

As usual, much depends on the fiction.  Depending on how awesome they are, maybe some monsters don't need to "concentrate" to give a PC the beat-down as they stroll/charge/lope across the battlefield toward the McGuffin of DOOOOOM!

Cross-posting a lot here, but quick note on the "lock down" aspect: remember that you make moves (soft ones) whenever anyone looks at you to find out what happens. So the fighter hack and slashes, gets a 10+, and then it's pretty clear that its your turn in the conversation of play: the fighter's looking at you to find out what the monster does in response. So you say "The ogre staggers back a step, sees blood spilling from the wound you left, and gets this scary-mad look in his eyes, he's going berserk. He turns to the column next to him and starts smashing it, it looks like he's bringing down the ceiling. What do you do?"

Player: "The goblins are dead now, so I'm focusing on saving Omar. I step between him and the ogre and slash at the ogre's legs, try to make him less mobile."

GM: "Sounds like hack and slash to me."

Or, GM: "Sounds like defend to me."

Depending on whether the Player wants to redirect the Ogre to him, or just try to kill the Ogre before it can get to Omar.

Cross-posting a lot here, but quick note on the "lock down" aspect: remember that you make moves (soft ones) whenever anyone looks at you to find out what happens. So the fighter hack and slashes, gets a 10+, and then it's pretty clear that its your turn in the conversation of play: the fighter's looking at you to find out what the monster does in response. So you say "The ogre staggers back a step, sees blood spilling from the wound you left, and gets this scary-mad look in his eyes, he's going berserk. He turns to the column next to him and starts smashing it, it looks like he's bringing down the ceiling. What do you do?"

Oooh! I like this one.

In this case, if the Fighter responded with:

Player: "I charge the Ogre and drive my sword into it's spine before it can bring the place down."

Would that be:

Hack and Slash - attacking in melee?
Defend - standing in defense of the location?
Defying Danger - preventing the ceiling from coming down?

Hmmm.

Would that be:

Hack and Slash - attacking in melee?
Defend - standing in defense of the location?
Defying Danger - preventing the ceiling from coming down?

Hmmm.

Aha!  You thought you had me with this one!

Defend! (Probably)

If the ogre ignores you, it's not H&S.
Defying Danger is only useful here if whatever he does on the other side of it stops the ogre/cieling.
So, Defend. ;)

It's interesting that I'm not finding a "Get someone to do something you want by force..." move.

And, Hack and Slash is so generic (attack someone in melee) that it could be applicable to any number of other moves (I'm attacking to Defend, I'm attacking to Defy Danger, etc.).

in this case i would say it would be hack and slash. you are proactively attacking the ogre in melee(driving you sword into its spine)

while i do appreciate the story aspects of this game the mechanics need to be taken into account as well. if, in this situation, you were to:
a) defend; you could protect someone from taking damage (okay this makes sense if the ceiling is falling, but it currently isnt, the ogre is trying to bring it down)
b) defy danger; prevent youself from taking damage (again if the ceiling was in the middle of falling i say this would be great, but again the ceiling isnt falling yet)

hack and slash is the only move that can do anything in this situation (of the three) the fiction should never dictate you do a useless move. if you want to stop the ogre by driving a sword into its spine, that is clearly an attack. the results you want to get from attack it, that is different.

a "get something you want by force" move would be great, but if the feel of the game is supposed to be like DnD that is usually done by hitting something with your sword. if one did exist it would generate a lot of conversation about just what can you force to do something you want? (walk in on a dragon, make it do something by force! how? ummm, hit it with my sword until it submits! how? etc etc etc)

i still do not feel at ease with hack and slash's ability to take damage twice in a round. maybe this is because we have routinely fought things that do half on my total hp per hit but it seems like it makes melee a very very dangerous option. if hack and slash is not meant to be a joined combat between two agents then i feel like the outcome for a partial hit should not be take damage but rather a set of inconveniences like casing spells or volley.

i still do not feel at ease with hack and slash's ability to take damage twice in a round.

I don't think there are rounds in DW.

Well, you know, you've got the whole conversation going so there's no "gotcha".

If you say you're stabbing the ogre, the GM should make it clear that unless your damage is enough to kill it (no roll since the ogre isn't "ready") that the ceiling will come down.

(And Defend would work because you can Defend a "place".)

As for Hack & Slash, don't think of it as taking damage twice.  It's taking damage two different times from two different events.  If the Fighter stands there and waits to see what the monster will do, he's being "defensive" and will need to Defy Danger when it inevitably attacks.  Once the monster's intent is displayed, the Fighter can merrily Hack & Slash at it until he screws up or decides to stop and watch the monster again.

despite the insistence that there are no rounds there still has to be some sort of turn taking or exchange. if you insist on taking the word 'round' in the literal dungeons and dragons initiative sense, fine.
i am fairly certain you know full well what i meant by that statement but i will clarify it for you anyway.
i do not feel at ease with the way hack and slash mandates damage being dealt back to the hack and slasher on a partial success so in the instance where a monster or other type of adversary is attacking one of the adventurers and the adventurer desires to fight back the adventurer has the opportunity to take damage twice from one narrative situation. the situation being the adversary and the adventurer join in single combat.
better?

@ludanto: from what ive gathered from this conversation, hack and slash does not prevent the monster from taking moves. so if hack and slash just prevents the monster from taking moves against the fighter (if the fighter rolls a 7-9, it seems a 10+ really doesnt do anything to the monsters move selection) all you are doing is forcing the monster to attack someone else. something that probably is not desirable.

i really think the solution to this whole predicament is to change hack and slash so taking damage is not the mandated result of a partial success. give the move options like volley and cast a spell. sure leave take damage on there but do not mandate it.

despite the insistence that there are no rounds there still has to be some sort of turn taking or exchange. if you insist on taking the word 'round' in the literal dungeons and dragons initiative sense, fine.
i am fairly certain you know full well what i meant by that statement but i will clarify it for you anyway.
i do not feel at ease with the way hack and slash mandates damage being dealt back to the hack and slasher on a partial success so in the instance where a monster or other type of adversary is attacking one of the adventurers and the adventurer desires to fight back the adventurer has the opportunity to take damage twice from one narrative situation. the situation being the adversary and the adventurer join in single combat.
better?

I think you're missing the part earlier where I talked about the cadence of the fiction and moves.

It's something I didn't "get" when I first started playing AW. Eventually, you realize it's there, built into the moves.

But, go back and read my post a page or two back, where I use Hack and Slash in two different examples, one with a 10+ and one with a 7-9.

There's a back and forth there that you might be thinking about when you refer to "rounds". Honestly, it's just a conversational rhythm in AW and I presume the same for DW.

So the MC doesn’t get to roll right? The MC makes moves and the player makes moves.

The fact that H&S has a potential result of taking damage is part of the move, right?

So the ogre makes a move, which the player responds to (defend, defy danger, whatever), and then the player makes a move.

Now, that isn’t to say that the ogre gets to ‘attack’ every ‘round’. But it would be totally boring to me as a player and an MC if all that was happening was H&S. So the ogre, I think, should get to ‘do’ stuff. The example feels like a 'surprise round' to me. Now I would be mad if all the MC had the ogre do is ‘attack’, I want the ogre to knock over pillars or try to disarm my guy or whatever.

Maybe it would help to think about it this way: if the MC were allowed to roll dice, the MC would be making the H&S move too, right? So both could potentially take damage twice a ‘round’. Yeah?

yes, ive read your posts. your slight dismissive of my entire post over a single choice of words is rather irritating, though. i understand that are not rounds in the your turn my turn sense of other games, that has been established through pages of discussion earlier in this post by you and others and, i will admit, it is something that we have been doing wrong.

as per your examples of hack and slash with 7-9 and 10+ on the previous page, the 7-9 exchange leaves you in the situation that agony first started this whole thread about. if the 'flow of combat' hinges on the hero who is hack and slashing as long as a 7-9 is rolled then the monster is effectively 'locked down' (the fighter brings his axe into the ogres shin and gets a knee to the spleen for his efforts, fighter gets to make the next move) the only way this is broken is if the DM/MC makes another move with the monster.

on the flip side, if the monster has the initiative (in a narrative sense so i do get 'there is no initiative in DW') and is attacking the fighter the fighter can respond in several ways; defend, defy danger, hack and slash. if the fighter defends or defies danger then the flow of the narrative will stay with the monster until something special happens, if the fighter decides to engage the monster with hack and slash then what happens? does the fighter:
a) roll defy danger then hack and slash
b) roll hack and slash and a defy danger
c) roll hack and slash and a defy danger on a 10+ and 6- result?

and again, i think this would be fine if taking damage was not the only option for getting a 7-9 on hack and slash.

yes, ive read your posts. your slight dismissive of my entire post over a single choice of words is rather irritating, though.

Hey, bud, I'm not being dismissive and sorry if it came out that way. You seem agitated with me, so I'll let someone else pick up the torch. ;)