Chopper Custom Move for Padding Out Gang

Come along! NOW!: When “convincing” someone or a small group it’s in their best interest to join your gang, roll +hard: On a 10+, they join you at no cost and are fairly motivated: choose none and take +1 to gang-related moves. On a 7-9, they join you, but with a catch: choose 1. On a miss, they join you for now, but you’ll really wish they didn’t.

• You have to put down the rebellious half first or they’ll be out of commission for a while after you’re done with them.
• They’re fucking thieves, alright, but not always in your favor. The GM gains 1 hold to take something from you when you need it most. Can’t be countered by the Fucking Thieves move.
• This crew isn’t as useful as you first thought and is going to take some breaking in. Lose 1 gang benefit or gain 1 gang vulnerability, the MC will tell you which, until the next time you use this move or the problem is resolved, as appropriate.

As far as I know, the Chopper has no built in way to replace gang members, and I'm unaware if there's already something like this on the forums.

You could just say they gain gang members when the time seems right narrative-wise, or you can use this if it seems useful or interesting to you. An adviser and I made the move, and I'm open to criticism for improving it. Depending of the feel of your campaign, I might also suggest making this move more cruel, by making the 10+ result choose 1, and the 7-9 result choose 2.

P.S.: What it really needs is a better name.

You might not be pleased with the result or implications of this move. Or maybe so, but considering the following first:

People can use a move against anyone, even another PC unless explicitly stated. So lets say we have a pc that doesn't want to join this gang, their only option following the application of this move would be to interfere and hope they really badly mess up. Okay, sure that's an easy fix, but what if you've got an NPC who you already know DOESNT wanna join the gang, should this hard move compel the NPC against the logic of the fiction? It doesn't really make a lot of sense there either. Actually, isn't this sort've like manipulating a PC/NPC? You tell them what you want, roll, and then they can make you fulfill a promise that makes their "cost" logical for the fiction and might be very hard to fulfill? Or easy, depending on motivation.

Setting that aside too for the moment (and really I'm not trying to bash creativity here), this somewhat undermines any advance that would increase a gangs size; Why pay for gang size increase if you can buy this move and just use it on everyone. I mean that is some serious power. You could have an army, and every single gang of enemies is more then likely also going to be compelled by this move to join, even say... other character's gangs? Lots of problems that would need to be ironed out. It could work with some retailing of the trigger to be more specific, but then I have to look at your intent.

Your intent as stated was to allow a gang to "recover" dead or missing members. This is fair, and useful for every character that has followers or a gang. Although depending on the fiction it probably decreases the "cost" of killing, since you can generate ample supplies of fodder quite easily with this move. Lose ten battles, win the war via attrition. But lets stop there and actually look at how other people might've solved this particular need. It is something that has come up in multiple of my different games. I hope some of my solutions help you to figure out what works for you.

The First is probably the most basic to AW: the fiction is both prescriptive and descriptive. That means if something happens in the game world through the logical narrative of the gameplay, then it happens regardless of whether there is a move for it. It also means if a move describes some change to the game world, that the change occurs as well. It goes both ways. What this means is, you don't need rules for increasing gang sizes, necessarily. They just need to actually go out and get more guys for their gang. That might be HARD or EASY and it can come with as many strings as it does. If they take an advance to increase their numbers, then its assumed that in the background this is happening, rather then the foreground.

Now for me, I didn't necessarily want my players running off with manipulation rolls in some constant attempt to have the largest army around, and I know some of them would've made it a priority. So for me it worked better to say that they can easily maintain their original gang size as a capacity. So if they lost members, they could recruit to fill the gaps, but if they brought even more on broad over their advances cap, then they ran the risk of thinning everyone's cut, payment, happiness--while at the same time guaranteeing some increased unrest within the numbers.

The reason that I went about it in this way, was that there were many times when they needed more people to fight for them, sometimes temporarily paying another warlord to help, sometimes getting involved in intra-hardhold politics to bring differing gangs to bear on the sitch. Sometimes they just proved to be rather bad at keeping guys cause they either never trusted anyone new, thus every death weighed very heavily on the character in question (a neat aspect of the mechanical pressure creating real emotional connections for the character) and other times because they just kept killing their own people for little things (rule by fear).

For example, if you've got a gang that's down a couple of bikes and more then a few guys, maybe you have to go raid/scavenge someplace for parts, maybe you need to go back for the broken ones for repair, maybe you have to go find another chopper gang out their in the plains and make some hard bargain. If you need more people, maybe you need to manipulating some thugs, or win over some fans, or get another player to do it for you. Or hell, maybe you just need to gather up some caps and just barter for the lot of them and raid for their happiness. How they get the people should be part of the fiction, and I don't think that this is a situation that can easily be summed up in one move; its not really a situation where I'd personally feel comfortable giving up the MC's principal driven authority to the dice; at least not on such a macro scale.

I guess what I'm saying is: How do they recover members? To do it, do it.

I rather enjoy the philosophy of the AW system, that's one of the reasons I always have such long posts here.  I actively enjoy thinking about it and responding. I'm certainly fallible and sometimes embarrassingly so.  I would hate to appear judgmental or condescending, so please don't take my enthusiasm for the opportunity to talk with people about this as a act of pomposity.

This being said, I've continued to think about the applications of a move that was designed to help setup situations that could lead to all sorts of interactions... including recovering more members. What if instead of having the move trigger when the PC interactions with a Not gang member, it created or established a trading hub someplace. You know, where those mobile wanderers might stop for a pit stop, some desert gas-station far too far away from the "hardhold" to be readily obvious, but for the chopper with a mobile tag on this guys...

Example: Caravaner ; The Pit Stop ; The Crossroads
there are some places so far out in the middle of nowhere that hardly anyone ever gets there. Well... except those that need get somewhere even further. For these travelers, raiders, traders and nomads... there is a place that's sortve a safe haven on in the wastes, a stopping ground for those that come from far away and get going right after... a place that only those whose home is the road would ever find.

Basic tossed together rough draft, two rules. One for one scene one for off-scene, only one should be used. Depending on your particular tastes.

You know a place out there in the middle of nowhere and when you need a thing that doesn't seem to be anywhere nearby you can spend some time going out there to search for it. (phrase like the operator for off scene, or just go with a reasonable cost/trigger for the on-scene stuff [personally time is cost enough I'd think])

When you head out there, tell the GM what you're looking for and roll +stat. On a 10+ you find what you're looking for, but you have to pay its cost. On a 7-9 you find something near-enough but it might cost more, or have some strings. On a miss, you find what you were looking for but not the way you wanted to find it, you can get it but there are some serious strings attached.

------------

Now that I'm looking at this, the optional barter moves might already provide you the framework to setup contacts, recruit members off-scene, prompt sitch's for on-scene recruitment. When you go into a hard holds bustling market... in this case a hard-hold for choppers might be some place out in the middle of no where. Then the barter moves with sharp might help you find a thing, hot might help you convince a guy, barter might just buy you what you wanted either way. I didnt think about those as alternatives until just now, but it did sortve take the steam out of creating a new move to settle it. I'd probably just go with those. Plus they could always grab moves from other playbooks that just make a thing happen, like Lost or a the few in the MaestroD.

In retrospect, just re-read the barter moves. I think they cover what you wanted entirely, you just have to consider that the "thing" they want, might be more gang members. The costs and implications are right there, and the strings are tailor made by the MC to fit any sitch. For the actual move you have in the OP, I'd think Manipulate is the goto move for active persuasion.

First off, you're not condescending, and if you were it might be appropriate, as this is only the second campaign I've GMed, and the first hardly counts. You seem much more experienced with running AW as it is designed than I am.


Join me or die: When you and your gang have an utterly dominating position on a few NPCs or less not belonging to another PC, and try “convincing” them it’s in their best interest to join your gang, roll +hard: On a 10+, they join you at no cost and are fairly motivated, at least for now: choose none and take +1 to gang-related moves. On a 7-9, they join you for now, but with a catch: choose 1. On a miss, they join you for now, but you’ll really wish they didn’t.

• You have to put down the rebellious half first or they’ll be out of commission for a while after you’re done with them.
• They’re fucking thieves, alright, but not always in your favor. The GM gains 1 hold to take something from you when you need it most. Can’t be countered by the Fucking Thieves move.
• This crew isn’t as useful as you first thought and is going to take some breaking in. Lose 1 gang benefit or gain 1 gang vulnerability, the MC will tell you which, until the next time you use this move or the problem is resolved, as appropriate.

Sorry, this move was definitely not meant to work on PCs, I just forgot to specify that. When it comes to NPCs that you know would NEVER join the gang, well, there are already mechanics for that: the advanced Going Aggro and Seduce or Manipulate moves. This move is supposed to read like a 12+ Go Aggro. One of the things I like about this game is that sometimes you can make things happen that shouldn't be able to happen, cause you're a badass. There are no truly in-any-way untouchable NPCs, if going by AW principles and rules. That said,  I understand the problem of a major "antagonist" suddenly being a happy member of your gang for only a 10+ or even 7-9. There a few possible solutions I can see. Let me know which you think is best or if you have any alternative solutions.
1. Specify that the move can be used only at the MC's discretion, which goes against the "say yes or roll dice" principle, so this option isn't my favorite.
2. Specify that the move can be used only on nameless NPCs (because nameless NPCs are never that strong-willed). This also isn't ideal to me, because I like the idea of named NPCs joining your gang. It establishes some on-scene prior history with gang members, which I think could be neat. This is negotiable though.
3. Rework the move so that even at best, there is potential for sabotage by vindictive and tactical NPCs of importance. This is definitely doable.
4. Specify that no matter the result, they only join your gang "for now" (whatever the reason), and might choose to leave almost immediately. This is the one I choose for now, but it's not my preferred choice either.

I reworded the move requirements so you should no longer be able to "lose ten battles and win the war," take other character's gang members, or increase gang size without putting in a lot of time, as well as not using your gang as a weapon for many sessions.

Also, I originally said: "You could just say they gain gang members when the time seems right narrative-wise, or you can use this if it seems useful or interesting to you." What I realize now, is that this move is meant to be used in addition to the "They need to get more guys for their gang, so they do and the MC attaches strings" attitude. This move is meant to replicate something I think fits in this type of game, as well as fill out gang members: Overwhelming someone and then demanding they work for you. (This is also why the barter moves aren't scratching the right itch, though I failed to mention this motivation in my first post). That wouldn't be the only way to gain gang members, and everything else could be handled as you described!

Hopefully I've de-macroed the move enough to be acceptable. By the way, since this move is definitely supposed to be more Go Aggro than Seduce or Manipulate, one could argue that the Going Aggro basic move could be good enough for what I'm trying to do here, and they wouldn't be wrong. I just personally wanted something surrounding this idea that was a little more specialized.

I would avoid going against the principals, especially by design (which it seems like options 1 to 3 do). I think you're right that Go Aggro already contains the essentials to threaten an NPC into doing something. I guess at this point my primary question for you is why? Why does this recruitment interaction need a specialized move? Between the barter moves giving you ways to find new guys naturally, the hard move giving you ways to threaten NPC action that don't have these inherent restrictions, and hot covering aspects of persuasion; what is the intent behind the move?

If its to simply to have some cool options on a table, that's fair. I do like the ideas within the move, I caution against an overly situational class advance however. Your new version doesn't give so much power as it is just hard to use and it doesn't really make for a better choice option wise then go aggro. If you admit they could try this without, and they wont suffer the draw backs as listed--just the possibility the other gang wont say yes willingly, then that seems a safer way to force the issue.

Is this move still intended to fulfill a characters ability to get new members into his gang? Or is it more specifically designed for a specific chopper who is charismatic and scary in some extrasensory way? I mean as a custom move for a specific character this might have more traction, though now that you've acknowledged/built in? its limitations I'm wary that it doesn't go so far as to be relevant. Perhaps a more if you could provide a specific narrative example of this in play, it might provide more grounds for feedback, in what situation could you see this move working (or needing help) during gameplay and how would that workout?

PS. As a caveat I'd like to say that many of my house moves during my first three games ended up backfiring in some way, either they were never used, didn't work to satisfaction, just did it unnaturally or were more cumbersome then not having them at all. I had to keep reminding myself the KISS (keep it simple stupid) principal and then really looked hard at what a move is. That was essentially, a move is the event where one players authority is imposed upon an element of the world whose outcome was not obvious and whose result needed to be disclaimed by the dice rather then your word. Is this hiring a guy? I'm not sure that what this move does anymore, its sortve more like kidnapping to me--cool still but not as needed.

Making a copy of Go Aggro as a base and re-scripting the options to be character specific might be a cool house move, but if it doesn't accomplish something "new" I'd think you should make it more more generic so it could apply on anyone with followers or gangs and say its a custom base move rather then chopper specific advance.

PPS: Join me or Die? No narrative result of the move ends in death. I think something along the lines of You're Mine. might more apt.

1st paragraph response: The reason why is because I want some more interesting options than; they join you and all's good or they don't. I find success that might not be what's best more interesting than failure or success. I'd also ideally like to make the Chopper's gang more mechanically interesting. Right now I just don't feel like they have much going on for them, at least in terms of playbook moves.

I guess the heart of the matter is that, for me, specialized moves with atypical outcomes are more interesting to me than generalized moves with the same outcomes across situations. As a caveat, I admit that too many of them wouldn't work. This definitely isn't something I'm suggesting for everyone, just for those who might like it or find it useful.

2nd paragraph: Again, it's not necessarily about what's wise. I originally made this move crueler than it is because I wanted it to match up with the Pack Alpha, which to me implies that the gang can sometimes be more of a liability than a boon. That's at the heart of the Chopper, for me. Keep in mind this is not something I'm suggesting every Chopper has to use.

3rd: It's not meant to be the only way to get new members into a gang, it's just meant to be one of them. It's very true that this might be more helpful in MY AW game run by ME, if I'm accidentally doing things too far from the general AW experience. I'll also admit I did make this for a specific player in my game, though I thought it might be useful or neat to others. I could easily be wrong though.

PS: This is definitely not hiring a guy. It is more like kidnapping. Think of when a pirate boards an enemy ship and forces the other ship's crew to work for him. It's that, minus pirates. I agree, definitely not needed. What I was hoping for was something more like "Neat!"

I'm about to start running a session, I'll give the player a brief rundown of what you explained, and see if he opts to try it out or not, then report back with what extent it worked or did not work if he tries it. Also, as of right now, it's meant as a Chopper base move, not an advance. Sorry I didn't make that clear. That said, it is meant to be Chopper/gang specific.

PSS: That's a WAY better name! Thank you so damn much! Even if this move doesn't turn out well, my terrible attempts at a name for it were driving me insane.

One of the most important things to remember when designing moves that allow a character to influence another character's behavior, is to always "pass decision-making onto the victim, the defender, the looser." Go Aggro is a good example of this: the victim never actually has to do whatever it is that you want them to, as long as they're willing to force your hand and take the consequences. Even In Brain Puppet Strings, a move that is literally mind control, follows this rule: You say what you want them to do, and can spend holds to punish them if they disobey, but you can't actually make them do it if they really don't want to, and are willing to eat the harm. Hypnotic is similar: you get holds on them, and as long as you have the holds, they either can't act against you (NPCs), or have to Act Under Fire to do so (PCs), but they decide what they want to do to spend the hold that you have over them.

What does this move do that the existing Seduce/Manipulate move doesn't already handle?

I anticipate that your answer will be "it guarantees they become members", or something similar, but... Why?

If you find a crew and you convince them to join your gang, maybe you gotta beat them first, maybe not, whatever. But you find this crew, you say "hey, join me, work for me, we're gonna kick ass and steal and stuff" because that's what chopper gangs do – they roll into town and take everything and dare you to stop them (see the move Fucking Thieves, which establishes that chopper gangs take things. They just do.) and you roll a 10+, great! They join up!

But what if you roll a 7-9? They want proof, right? So you gotta offer them some of the spoils. And later, if they don't like how little they're getting, they can leave. But guess what?


So can the chopper's default gang.

No status quo. Nothing is sacred. The chopper doesn't get niche protection. If chopper is a total wad and his gang hates him and leaves )or beats her up and kicks her out), oh well for chopper. Same if she gets them all killed.


This custom move only exists to get around the fiction. That strikes me as a bad custom move. Am I off base?

Im pretty sure now that at the heart of this is just the flavor of the rules. You're interested in specific gritty sitches outlined in neat ways within the moves, sort of a self-stylized guide. That's definitely cool. Don't assume that running AW differently is running AW badly either. Its not a large scale rule system, its a small adaptable one. Its suppose to be molded. What the rest of this boils down to is that while I might see a vague simplistic rule as an opportunity to barf forth specific detailed and gritty apocalyptica, you see it as something that lacks the same level of gritty inspiration. That's totally understandable.

I think you might just be underestimating the power of those bland basic moves though. I've run a half dozen of pretty intense AW games over the last two years, and I never had a move made or failed with the same result. Not once. Nothing is sacred in AW, just cause a guy is in your gang doesn't mean he isn't a threat. It does not give him the ally or friend tag, even if he might appear to be those things. Forcing children into your biker gang works, but probably has its own limitations, which are both prescriptive and descriptive. They might get a tag for it, or they might not count towards gang size, whatever. What I mean is, the choppers gang is as lively as you and he make it, and they're as loyal as the situation and your principals demand. You're not out to get him, but your job is to make his life interesting, not easy.

Strings is a very powerful term for example, so are promises, so are the ways in which the threat reactions from go aggro can be interpreted. What I really wanted to know, and what I'd like to see before I can (personally) get behind this move, is an example where it does something the other preexisting moves cannot do, or where it out preforms the basic moves that overlap it's range. If I can see where it plugs the gap, for example, I think we might be able to Kiss it down to something that doesn't need caveats to function as a standalone cool power. As it stands, its neat, but with some hiccups.

One of the most important things to remember when designing moves that allow a character to influence another character's behavior, is to always "pass decision-making onto the victim, the defender, the looser." Go Aggro is a good example of this: the victim never actually has to do whatever it is that you want them to, as long as they're willing to force your hand and take the consequences. Even In Brain Puppet Strings, a move that is literally mind control, follows this rule: You say what you want them to do, and can spend holds to punish them if they disobey, but you can't actually make them do it if they really don't want to, and are willing to eat the harm. Hypnotic is similar: you get holds on them, and as long as you have the holds, they either can't act against you (NPCs), or have to Act Under Fire to do so (PCs), but they decide what they want to do to spend the hold that you have over them.

I just wanted to mention that this holds true for moves that deal with NPCs too. Not as explicitly, but in order to retain a sense of consistency to a character, its best to have outs for a move that could be worse of the target, but allowed them to retain their pride/hunger/lust/other defining quality. If you threaten a charitable school teacher in the post apoc to join up with the gang or die, she might choose to die. That seems like a fair thing, why should she on a 10+ suddenly decide that raiding the poor and weak is suddenly okay? Even for just now? Basically, all moves exist to force or inspire certain optional actions, but it should never totally remove them. Go Aggro always lets them suck it up, even if they know they're gonna die. It is important, especially to the MC. You have to make the world seem real, after all, not just let the players get it all all the time. In fact I'm pretty sure that most good things should turn to shit is in the rules, not all, but more often then not.

The exceptions are critical successes after advancing a move. 12+ (or 13+ if in my game)


Random General Tip: Since its in our principals to give every NPC a name and make every NPC human. It is also a good idea to make every NPC that is pushing for screentime, or that has interacted with two different PCs differently, a threat. take a look at the threat guide for ideas, they dont have to be extreme or overly active. A one line, what do they want, love, need etc. When those conflict with another NPCs wants, or the sitch changes and they no longer get those wants fulfilled... even a happy loyal camper might suddenly stop being so happy. Its a really good idea to know what "strings" are holding the people together, and when those strings get threatened, frayed, or break.

Was thinking.

You're Mine
When you have them over a barrel and attempt to conscript some NPCs to your cause, roll+hard.
On a 10+ they have to choose: force your hand and get taken by force, or cave in and join up.
On a 7–9, they have to choose 1:
• some do and some don't
• come with you either way, but they add a stipulation and, you get +1 experience if you agree
• come with you, but are disloyal or out of control
• come with you, but they throw their weight around within (really this should always be true, ignore this one)
• force your hand and get taken by force

(yes it is go aggro, but the wording might appeal to your particular interests more. I still don't really like it, but I like it more.)

caveat: Even on a hit, the npcs aren't bought for good, they're in until something better comes around.
However they're subject to the character's presence during which they may grow to like or hate him, loyalty
or more might be in the cards. If they cant fight, then they don't count towards gang size. This move also doesn't
automatically provide them with bikes.

It's not a perfect world use, but I think it does everything your other move does. There isn't any hold that cancels out fucking thieves, instead they're just a possible vulnerability if something goes missing, maybe they took it and ran, instead of they just pawned it off to some guy. loyalty. But disloyalty doesn't mean just that, maybe they make themselves available to another player looking for "intel" or whatever.

The some do and some don't gives you the show of force, a fight, a split, to the death or just needing to blacken more eyes, let the fiction decide. Which means you have some flexibility to work with odd sitches. Its a good partial since it sets them up for only half the members they couldve gotten.

Counter offers are neat because they reveal the strings of the NPC's motivation, useful for new npcs, and telling for old ones. If the PC refuses the stipulation, you have a possible backstab in progress, as soon as can be expected. Great for a really hard response to the players vulnerable Missed roll at some point in the future. But more importantly, if you break that proimse later after accepting, then you can expect many such acts of disloyalty--triggering a lot of pack alpha, which might also give them time to forge strings within other members of the gang. So it might not just be this guy, but might be more like half of them agree. Ways for you to implant threats via the player.

The throw their weight around within provides you opportunities for the new members to get into the faces of the old members, cause chaos within the ranks, or whatever else you want them to do. Heck, maybe they just don't stand down all the time or as quick and are a pack alpha in the making. They want what you your yours have, and will fight to get it, for you or against you as the fiction demands.

And theirs always the option of just plain and simple open defiance, which will probably end in them getting killed. However, if it does come down to forcing your hand, then the violence is already primed and either you finish executing them, or if they're not helpless, its a FIGHT.

On a miss, something goes wrong, whatever you want. Maybe they say yes, but attack hard and violently as soon as they see the opening (that night, whatever). Maybe they say yes and another hard move happens. Maybe they say no and get the upper hand from you. Maybe it'll cost you to fight them (hostage), maybe you fucked up somewhere. Or maybe something else happened like the whole place is being shot up and these guys fucking run while you try not to die. It goes unsaid, because its a miss. The player didn't see it coming.

__
P.S. Using manipulate, and/or offering 1-barter for the 10+ is still a better option. Go aggro at least might not be, since you only get what you needed on the 10+ in that case, cause a partial sends them scattering while you attempt to inflict the threat. You might just (better then everything above) give the chopper a move that says when he attempts to recruit fucking hyenas into his gang he gets to roll hard for manipulate rather then hot. But really I think he should have to use Hot to do that, its very fitting in the core. Starry makes some very good points.

1.
When you convince people it's in their best interest to join your gang, add them to your gang.

Being "in your gang" is not a magical tag that's added to each person in a drop-down menu. What does your gang do for you and with you, day-to-day? Where do they live? By answering these questions, you should be able to tell, in-world, who's in your gang. If you add people to that group, then you've added them to your gang. There's no move to do so in the rules, but there is a comment about the rules being both descriptive and prescriptive. If you grow your gang, adjust your sheet accordingly.


2.
Alternately, just use go aggro on people you want to recruit, if it is that temporary (they probably won't stick around long if it's only the threat of violence that got them to join). If it's just a guy or two, you can probably do it yourselves but otherwise the litter of no-gooders count as a gang and you ought to bring your gang to the go-aggro harm calculation in order to be, er, coercive.

Go aggro I think works best when you ask people to do something concrete. Like "come back to our base". Then when it's time to go raiding, do you ask the new guys, cowering in fear by the fire, to join in? If so, do you need to threaten them with wippings again, or have they got the message? If they come, are you worried they'll desert you, let you down, or turn on you? Once you get to the point where the player and the MC agree that they are "in the gang", add them to your sheet and consider them included in rolls for pack alpha and fucking thieves from now on.



Both of the above alternatives presume that you do it in play, as in: you had already established who these people were, where they were hanging around, and then the Chopper player actually says they want to roll up and get them to join the gang. That's interesting, play that shit out. As above, either using go aggro, or just play out the conversation, possibly with manipulate rolls or promises, until you have triggered the "when you convince people..." from alternative 1.

However, the sort of move from the OP is cool to use in a love-letter – or more generally as a between-session / time-skip custom move. Then it's clear that you the MC is not giving them this move to use as they see fit, add it to your sheet-kinda deal. Rather, it's "instead of playing out the time when you go recruiting those freshly leaderless bandits out in the caves, how about you just roll this move?".

Unfortunately, our game ended, so the move didn't recieve proper testing. Anyway...

Hmm. The reason I wanted a move for this was to make sure that the Chopper could have a gang at all times. The book mentions that you shouldn't aim to take away what makes characters interesting: my reasoning is that if guns make the Gunlugger interesting, then the gang does that for the Chopper times 100. I WAS offering them niche protection because a Chopper without a gang is a playbook without moves/uniqueness, which is the worst fate a character can meet, in my opinion. A Chopper sans gang would be a very boring thing to me, though I realize that's just my personal opinion now. I can't behind the idea of "The Chopper has no gang? Too bad, so sad" even if that's the idea I'm supposed to have.

Taking what Ebok and Jonathan said into consideration, I think it would be best to make this move into a possible love-letter type thing. Otherwise, just leaving as a Seduce/Manipulate, either with hot or hard, works well enough.

If the chopper looses his gang, then maybe it's time to think about changing to a different playbook.

That being said, there's something about a chopper "conscripting" someone into their gang that doesn't sit right with me. The chopper is not the hard holder; they don't "own" territory, and their gang is not a (para)military unit. If someone really doesn't want to be in the chopper's gang, then they can just sneak away when the chopper isn't looking, run off to the next holding over, and that's the end of it. I guess you could keep them locked up and under guard to prevent this, but they're not really a part of the gang at that point. If you're going to keep someone in your gang, then there has to be a reason for them to want to be in your gang.

If a chopper loses his gang, there should be something to say about the importance of that narratively. Pack Alpha has the possibility built in, just like leadership does for the hardholder. The gang / hardhold for either is not sacrosanct. If a gunlugger gets his right arm cut off, and it means his big favorite ass gun isnt really as useful as it used to be for him anymore, then he doesnt get a new magic arm, he has to live with that and tell the story from this point forward. What does that mean to him? How does he deal with the loss? There is something human about loss and its power in any story.

Now, just like your first instinct as the dm should not be I cut off the gunluggers Arms! Or I take away all of his guns! You shouldnt aim to constantly or lightly take away the choppers gang. If the chopper loses it because he forced his gang to pack plha and then lost control, his gang is still out there somewhere. Maybe he's going to need to find a way to fucking take them back. Or maybe he needs to start rounding up a new gang, piece by piece, it wont be easy--it shouldnt be, that ruins the narrative importance of the loss. The gunlugger can always go for a big ass one handed gun just the same. Its a story either way.

A new playbook might be the next step, if that loss really changed who they are. Or maybe they're not done with the playbook yet and now have a bone to pick with someone. Of course they can also wither away and vanish (retire or just die) and bring in a new character as well. The thing is, actions have consequences, so if the chopper charges overwhelming odds and gets all of his people killed, but someone survives himself, then he is now that guy that got all his people killed for reason x. Question time, is reason x going to push people away or bring people in? Who knows, it all depends on the story.

Audient: This move wasn't supposed to imply that people can't decide to leave. And I agree with what Ebok said about some people choosing to die rather than join the gang. It was a very valid criticism. That said, the idea of forcing people in general to join your gang with intimidation/manipulation - at least initially - sits okay with me, so that's just a difference in opinion we have.

Ebok: I agree very strongly with your principles of focusing on the interesting narrative that results from the consequences of a character's actions, yet the idea of making a Chopper go gangless for 3-5 sessions as they piece together a new gang as quickly as narratively possible... makes me a bit uncomfortable: to go smoothly, it'd require a patient player with the same mindset as us, unless it were done off-screen. I'm a bit reluctant to ask that of anyone. With the right player(s), I think it would work super well, and would be the ideal solution, for sure.