Monsters - I am confused

  • 36 Replies
Re: Monsters - I am confused
« Reply #30 on: June 18, 2012, 04:56:45 PM »
These dungeon-delving pals of yours sounds like they really suck at dungeon-delving, Matthew. :)

I mean, they want to just run up to every monster and hit it until it falls over? I can't quite imagine in what D&D game that's a good idea or general practice. All editions have positioning and tactics in some form. Bizarre.

It sounds like your attempt to set expectations has fallen on deaf ears. There's only so much you can do to make it work. If they don't want to make an effort... oh well! You tried.

Re: Monsters - I am confused
« Reply #31 on: June 18, 2012, 05:21:06 PM »

Re: Monsters - I am confused
« Reply #32 on: June 18, 2012, 05:59:06 PM »
Maybe so.  Some of them are very good at spending hours creating death engine PCs in 4E or 3.X and then letting them go like tops to wreak holy havoc in those systems' dungeons.  Kind of like Car Wars or something...
I think there are some communications and personal issues involved on both sides of the table in my case; I've tried to be careful not to indict DW's procedures.
I need to set up a regular DW campaign with some people I know will enjoy the game.  It's not like Portland isn't teeming with gamers like that.
Leaving those things aside, what do people think about big bad solitary monsters opening with moves that give -1 or -2 ongoing to PCs and then PCs having to defy danger to shake the effects of those moves kind of like a sort of saving throw mechanic?  Has anyone used something like that to the good?

Re: Monsters - I am confused
« Reply #33 on: June 18, 2012, 06:13:12 PM »
Also, this is quite timely:

"Hellking Plutodaemon's Black Adamantine Prison" man, I have been there.  It is not as cool as it sounds.

Re: Monsters - I am confused
« Reply #34 on: June 18, 2012, 06:36:09 PM »
Oh! Yes, I've used the -1/-2 thing. In our short-lived dark fantasy AW hack thing. When something was greater than men, you took -1 ongoing against it and if it was beyond the pale, you took -2 ongoing. Unless you had some way of fighting on even-footing with it.

There's also the "strata" concept from Knife & Candle:
When something is below your stratum, you can't roll a miss against it. 9- is a partial success. Also, you get a critical result on a 12+.

When something is above your stratum, you can't roll a full success against it. 7+ is a partial success.

Maybe one of those will work for you.



  • 777
Re: Monsters - I am confused
« Reply #35 on: June 18, 2012, 08:31:16 PM »
Wow Matthew. As John says, you really have tried!

I think the -1/-2 foe like this mechanical badarssery lever may cater to these player's sense of 'fair', but on the whole what's then to stop them querying all such narrative 'dick' moves and asking for such modifiers to most rolls just so they can 'make a move'? At any rate, I hope that it quells some of the dis-satisfaction of your gamist die-hards :)

I mean, most of us avid story gamers love the choice embedded into the 7-9 result, and in my little group's experience, as they level, they consciously choose moves that give them narrative options as move results in preference to mechanical ones, because if you are savvy, they give you so much more authorial power. Higher levels usually equate to greater narrative strength, they love this!

As an actual example; our 2.0 ruleset, ancient Dragon that lived under the ruined complex deep within Phoenix Mountain was spawned through my own vague desires for a Smaug-like danger and subsequently fleshed out through provocative questioning and numerous spout lore and discern reality rolls (most of which were failures or 7-9 results).

They authored themselves that it was folly to even attempt to encounter this beast without hefty magical wards, a razor edged wit, good knowledge of the dragon's escape routes from her lair, a means to protect oneself against dragonfire and scrupulous ethics. The one thing I introduced as GM was that non-magical weapons would leave no lasting wound other than the memory of the one who dealt the blow. The wyrm then fabled to seek her antagonist's lot for retribution.

What's to stop a lvl 1 fighter from garnering a magic weapon and seeking out the beast with the potential of slaying the mythical creature with one lucky hack and slash move? Only getting into the narrative position to do so.

My point I guess is that in my experience, to 'win' this sort of player over is to not give them the mechanical crutches they desperately find comfort in, but enlighten them with the fictional power of moves. Disclaim decision making to them more often, especially when its not 'their' move, re-incorporate their authored NPCs, locations and artefacts as often as you can, making them integral to the emerging story. Allow them to develop a quest mythos for defeating legendary beasties and the then step-by-step fulfil them, gaining levels along the way and ultimately slaying the creature in a very satisfying narrative arc and effecting the fictional details of the world in ways a -1/-2 never could.

Re: Monsters - I am confused
« Reply #36 on: June 19, 2012, 11:41:05 AM »
I was in the same boat until recently - the people with whom I was playing not "getting" the game on one level or another and either not enjoying it or trying to force it to be more like other games with which they were more familiar.

I stopped running games for them and stopped playing in theirs. I got choosy about who I was going to play DW with and it made all the difference in the world. For my part, I was able to turn groups around the country on to DW and we're having a blast doing pickup games online whenever the mood strikes.

Except where negativity for negativity's sake was the issue, I don't blame my previous GMs and players. They just prefer a different style of game, and that's cool.