Hi everyone,
This thread is in response to P2's problems that (he?) has with the Beta 2 playbook. Specifically that he feels the Bard's beginning moves of Charming and Open and Any Port in a Storm are not particularly useful or 'iconic' to the class. Bards are his favourite character and the moves obviously don't speak to his concept of what a Bard should be. He prefers the concept of multi-class dabbler and the opportunities that signifies as a Bard 'diversifies'.
His response made me sit back and mull it over. I haven't played DW with a Bard in the group yet, though I really like the concept and implementation. Any Port in a Storm (in its old NPC-focused iteration) has long been used as a model for our group as the DW equivalent of the Burning Wheel Circles mechanic. I personally, really like the new version though, as it encapsulates any change in the town, and what with the new steading tags! Woo Hoo! If the GM is liberal in their use of the ask questions and use the answers principle, can support all manner of player authorship. In my mind, this is the iconic Bard move. But that's just my preference for what the Bard should encapsulate.
To me, the classes are the first 'flagged' choice that a player makes. They are unique, varied and not repeatable. They make me as a GM sit up and take notice. Why do you want to play the Bard? Why do you want to create your own signature weapon? Why to you want to cast spells? Why do you want to use deadly poisons?
They are very specific fictional (or in some cases mechanical) cues to the player (and thus me) on the type of story they want to tell. The smaller choices during chargen; look, stats, bonds, gear, and move details focus these flags and make my job as GM even easier. I know what the players want the game to be about.
Once that broad iconography is established, the fiction develops via the focus of these flags. But what if the initial playbook moves aren't what 'flag' you as iconic, or envisage the class the way you want? Is making a custom 'multi-class dabbler' move going to satisfy that discomfort?
I'm hesitant to 'hack' the playbooks most of all. Muddling their moves with others, focusing largely on the mechanical iteration instead of the powerful fictional potential of moves, dropping a move you feel is 'useless'; all seems backward to me. Heck, just playing with the basic moves as per the villager playbook leads to wonderfully disparate and 'iconic' characters based on the moves players (and GMs) make in the story and the resultant fictional choices.
It has made me seriously ponder the significance of the choices that Sage and Adam have been making. I've been 'hacking' DW ever since it first developed, as have most of the playtesters and folks giving this grand game a shot. Despite the old story games adage of 'don't hack the hack'. This feedback process however,has tempered the development of the game and the 'vision' that Sage and Adam (and Tony!) have considered over the last 2 years. As the final iteration draws ever closer I think I'm going to leave well enough alone.
Like with any other RPG, I'm going to use the Flags as written. Rather than replace, discard or modify I'm going to encourage folks to play the game with what is on the page for a good few sessions instead of ripping it apart at chargen. Just because there is a chapter on Advanced Delving, doesn't mean you need to use it straight away before the players have had a chance to 'flag' their intent with the choices given to them already.
I'm embracing the Bard as is. I think its a wonderful, balanced class and hope that someone decides to play one this weekend so we can all see what type of stories we can craft with the moves as written.