A Question Of Combat and NPC Agency

This is my first post on the site, so I guess I should say that even though I'm new to the "Powered by Apocalypse" system, I'm totally in love with it. In the past, the most rules heavy system I enjoyed was Dark Heresy, so being able to play something both gritty and action packed without so much time spent rolling for combat was a bit of a Godsend. Seeing my players actually roleplay is an amazing experience.

That being said, I have a few questions on combat. I've only run about three sessions now, with very little fighting. (Most of the warfare has been psychology.)

Is it generally to be presumed that unless otherwise stated, when an PC "seize by force" to make an attack, the NPC will always counter attack? What happens in positions where the NPC is unable to fire back? (For example, someone is shooting from stealth, or the NPC only has a melee weapon in a gunfight.) The PC's wouldn't suffer any harm in those situations, but the book seems to makes the presumtion any violent action will result in some kind of harm to the players.

Another question, the book mentions that NPC's can't roll, right? So what happens when an NPC wants to take initative, or tries to seize something by force themselve, or even go aggro? Do I just ask the players to "act under fire"? I'm just not used to a system where the NPC's are more reactive, rather than having more agency.

Sorry for my questions seem rather noobish, as I said, I'm new to the system!

Edit: I also have an additional question and how people use the "reload" stat in their game. For example, shotguns and revolvers have reload, but they might still have a few bullets in them. So, do GMs/do your GM's always make you reload, even if logically your character only used one bullet? I want to make use of the full game mechanics, but I can't help but feel in a lot of situations, the reload skill might get in the way of some more fun moments.

Welcome. If the NPC can't do anything, consider whether a move applies at all. You're always looking at your NPC "through crosshairs" asking yourself if it's time to destroy this thing you created. Maybe they eat a bullet.

NPCs aren't reactive. For everything you do or say, follow your Agendas, Principles, and Moves. Always. That includes NPC behaviors. So, asking for rolls may happen. But first and foremost, what MC move are you making? Is it in line with your Principles? Does it fulfill an Agenda?

Reload is just an excuse for you to use your "use up their resources" or "reveal an unwelcome truth" move at an opportune moment, or some other move highlighting the scarcity of ammo. Remember it's a conversation. You're not counting ammo. They're "blazing away" and "returning fire" and at some point, maybe they roll a miss and you're like "Ajak rounds the corner and you've got him dead to rights, but as you pull the trigger...click. He's looking at you with this smile on his face and a big fuck you axe in his hand. What do you do?"

Another question, the book mentions that NPC's can't roll, right? So what happens when an NPC wants to take initative, or tries to seize something by force themselve, or even go aggro? Do I just ask the players to "act under fire"? I'm just not used to a system where the NPC's are more reactive, rather than having more agency.

If it's your turn to say something, and you think your NPC is doing something, then think about what it is they are doing and then have them do it. It's not that NPCs lack agency, it's that their agency is not separable from their place in the world; they don't need to roll dice to shoot somebody, or manipulate people, or jump out of a window or blow up a bridge or do crazy psychic shit. They just do it when it makes sense, and then you see how the PCs react. The actions covered by the basic moves are not off limits to the NPCs, they just happen differently.

Like noclue said, it can be helpful to think of this in terms of MC moves; if what they are doing is shooting, maybe you are just going to deal some harm to the PCs, or put them in a tough spot. If they are manipulating people, the PCs could end up separated, or have some of their resources used up. And, yes, many of these moves might result in the PCs having to Act Under Fire -- but only when they decide what they are doing in reaction to the move.

You shouldn't say, on your turn, 'the bridge explodes under your feet! Act Under Fire to see what happens!' This is not a game of saving throws. If you told them earlier that the gang had rigged the bridge to explode and asked them 'what do you do?' and they haven't done anything about it, then later on when you get to make a hard move and the bridge explodes, it happens in its full, immediate consequences -- harm dealt, stuff destroyed, river impassable, etc. Or if the whole bridge exploding thing isn't ready to happen, then you say something like 'amidst the hail of gunfire and crazy shit going down, you see Balls dash over to a kind of jury-rigged detonator with a desperate look in his eyes. It looks like he's about to blow the bridge! What do you do?' THEN, depending on what they do, they might have to Act Under Fire to do it. It's important to have the context of some action, so that the move's outcomes make sense.

Welcome to the forums!

In regards to your question about PCs inflicting violence on NPCs, you basically have three choices:

1) If the PC has set things up such that it is completely reasonable for them to be able to successfully harm an opponent without risking any in return and with little chance of failure, simply let them inflict harm. This is what noclue is talking about when he mentions looking at the NPCs through crosshairs (advice which comes straight out of the book and which should be followed liberally).

2) If the PC has set things up such that it is possible for them to harm an opponent without risking any in return, but under which success is by no means a sure thing, then you're looking at go aggro.

3) If the PC wants to resort to violence but the opponent can and will do something about it to the tune of giving as good as they get, then you're looking at seize by force.

Which option you use depends almost entirely upon the fictional situation. If it has been established that I am a steely-eyed killer and I've got my high-tech sniper rifle sandbagged and scoped in on a target from 600 meters out, yeah, sure, let me whack the first unsuspecting dude who enters my sight picture, no roll necessary. If we're up-close and personal but I've got my gun trained on some dude and am trying to get him to do something he doesn't want to do, make me go aggro (because at the very least I'm going to have the chance to inflict Harm on that guy before his gun clears its holster). If it's a Mexican Standoff and everybody's got their guns trained on each other all nervous-like and I decide it's time to start shooting, well, I'm probably going to get shot in the process myself. Make me seize by force and live with the consequences.

Also keep in mind what hits and partials and misses mean in all of these circumstances. If I get a 7-9 on a go aggro roll, one of my opponent's options is to "barricade himself securely in," or "back away, hands where I can see." Some of these might be appropriate given the cricumstances (I find that "barricade himself securely in" is a pretty common response to crazy people waving guns). So let your NPCs do these things if the situation warrants. A partial hit on a go aggro may mean that the PC wants to get the NPC to do (or not do) something, but that the NPC is able to do something else before the PC can react.

Example: MC: "He's acting hinky, all nervous and squirrely and you get the impression he's not being strictly truthful."

PC: "OK, enough of this crap. I've already got my gun in-hand, so I stick it in his face and say, 'Give me the narcostabs. I won't ask again.'"

MC: "Roll + Hard."

PC: "Crap. An 8."

MC: "He swallows hard and looks cross-eyed at the muzzle of your gun. But just when you think he's gonna cave, he exhibits a kind of snakelike quickness you didn't think he had. Knocking the gun aside, he spins away. Then he's running for the Jeep screaming his fool head off, and you're blazing away after him, rounds passing close enough to make him sweat but not actually connecting - he's just too fast. He vaults over the vehicle's hood and you hear him land on the other side with an 'oof.' What do you do?"

So what the PC wants (the NPC to cooperate) and what he gets (the NPC "barricading himself in") are two different things predicated by the player's roll. As the MC it is perfectly within your right to narrate that the PCs miss a shot in this circumstance. There's no "roll to hit" in Apocalypse World, so don't get stuck in the idea that they need to roll for every shot they take.

In terms of the NPCs being passive, it is your responsibility as the MC to narrate the NPCs actions. But given that they do not roll dice, mostly their actions are going to change the fictional situation and/or set up your future moves. So rather than just standing there like a dope and waiting for the PC to do something, have the NPC take the initiative.

Example: "From behind the jersey-barrier, Cartwright pops up, AK-47 in his hands chattering away as he lays down suppressive fire in your direction. What do you do?" This is you announcing future badness, and has the added effect of having the NPC set up your potential next move (inflict harm as established). And if the player's answer isn't "Get the fuck down and make myself as small a target as I possibly can while commando-crawling for the nearest cover" then the next thing you say should probably be, "Great, but first take 3 Harm minus armor for being a bullet sponge" (i.e. follow through on the move you've set up). And if the response is stop-drop-and-roll, your response should probably be "Great, roll + Cool," and snowball from there.

This is an action that changes the tactical picture, but stops short of directly and immediately inflicting Harm on the PC. It gives the PC the chance to react, to do something of their own that changes the situation. "You see one of Keeler's guys working his way into position for a shot. The next time you see him, he's got an RPG on his shoulder and he's taking aim on Damson's truck. What do you do?" Or "As soon as the guns start coming out, Rolfball grabs the girl and holds her in front of him, human-shield style. What do you do?" So the NPCs are taking actions and doing things, things that are important to the fictional landscape. But no dice roll is necessary. And the player's responses to the question of "What do you do?" dictate what happens next. if it sounds like a move, make them roll. If it doesn't, allow them to simply narrate their actions. Then maybe it's the NPCs' turn again.

Back and forth, remember the game is a conversation.

Does this make sense? Does it help?

As they mentioned above, rolls are not always needed to determine something. If a PC has a guy tied to a chair, and he says, "I pull out my gun and just shoot them in the head". Maybe it is just as simple as saying, Bang, the guy is dead. If the target of the aggression has no realistic way to avoid getting shot in the head, then that is that. If other people are trying to stop it or might interfere, maybe its an acting under fire instead.

Now, you can lead up to the moment where a sleeping guy gets offed by making the situation have other complications. Say you've got a player sneaking into a enemy bar to assassinate some guy. If they can just walk in, maybe they notice other people around the bar that might become a problem after a fight breaks out; maybe they notice the target hanging out with his kid; or maybe everyone inside will damn kill the PC on the spot if he's seen. Each of these examples sets up a different kind of tension, and you can probably think of dozens of ways to make a scene complicated.

It is these complications that make for a gripping scene. So your guy have to sneak in without anyone noticing who they are, and get all the way up the stairs and into a room to wait for the guy. Act under fire (risking being recognized) as you push your way through the crowd with your hoody down. The player gets into a hiding place and waits for the guy to come in and fall asleep. Is he alone, is there loud music playing? If so, maybe the PC can just step up and whack the guy, no questions asked. If its way to quiet, maybe moving on this old creaky floor makes a lot of noise, you tell the PC they can off the guy, if they can cross the room to him without waking him/ whoever else might be there. Roll Acting Under fire (against alerting danger). If the Player hits then maybe they're just dead. On a partial, well maybe someone heard, the target woke up and screamed first, the other person in the room woke up but not in time, the player kills the guy and almost get out before someone notices, or they kill them and open the door looking into the eyes of their buddy. On a miss? pick your poison, but don't inflict harm on the PC without first announcing the harm and giving them a chance to react.

Weaknesses on vehicles, keywords on weapons, complications in a scene aren't there to always get in the character's way. They're there so on partial hits and misses, you have a ready supply of things that could go wrong. Additionally, they provide the tension and suspense that makes doing the task perfectly all the more rewarding AND it also paints the risks to the PC ahead of time so they're not totally surprised/taken-a-back/thinking you screwed them when the thing that goes wrong goes wrong.

Just as a tip for AW combat, Armor is not an unpenetrable shield either. If the knife cant hurt that two armor having guard, maybe they have to get way to close, risking harm, detection, initiative before they can sink that knife in-between a crack. You have the right to tell them to act under fire while they attempt to seize the target by force, the seize is just to land the blow, the act under fire of the armor's protection is to see if the knife will stick in them all harmless like or actually end the guy. Likewise you can use missed rolls to expose vulnerabilities in armor as well.

As for how enemies ACT, think of it this way. When a PC hits on a 10+, it's like the enemy misses. So always describe the enemy action and keep it right there in front of the player where they can see, just when it comes down to decide the results, let the player's roll decide. This is why when a PC misses, one of the more common ways to handle the situation is to reverse the move. I'll provide a quick example:

Joe (pc) has a big damn knife and is approaching Leer (npc). Joe is all pissed over something Leer just did--seeing him coming, Leer pulls out a handgun and rests it on the counter--tapping his finger on the barrel. Maybe words are had, maybe not, but whatever the case, Joe's player says he bum-rushes the counter, aiming to leap over and butcher Leer like the pig he is. You say sure, roll seize by force. Joe rolls a 4, Miss. What do you do?

Well, its pretty clear from the roll that Leer is going to pull up that gun and start shooting Joe as he closes in. So you CAN (but don't have to) consider the situation as if Leer just made the seize by force roll on a charging Joe. Look at the seize by force and pick some options, deal more harm, suffer less, taking definite hold of his position. Deal harm+1 to Joe, describe joe's attacks as dealing harm but not enough, describe it all cool like, but end the action with something like Leer wounded from a damn knife wound (not fatal), and Joe having been shot a few times maybe having been forced into some bad spot taking cover from the guns. Of course, you'll want to up the anty in my opinion too, so maybe Joe also hears the sounds of more coming to the gunfire. He doesn't know whose side they're on. What does he do now?

Thank guys, your advice is really helping me better understand the system, and what I'd need to figure out to change in my GMing style for the better. It seems like I need to work creating more tension through details, and better setting up scenarios. As yyu might imagine, in the past I've let the rules do some of the work for me, but clearly that won't go very far in Apocalypse World. To be fair, part of the reason I've been enjoying this so much is how it challenges me as the Gamemaster.

Awesome. I think you will discover that the rules will still do a great deal for you, just maybe in a slightly different way than you are used to. Once you get everyone focused on the fiction and the people in it, things tend to get their own momentum very quickly!