2nd Edition Kickstarter

About weird: Right on, Paul.

The switch from fronts to the threat map is just an easier way to get the same goods, yeah, same as the changes to Hx.

Tim: There won't be an EU hardback run, no. We need to do as big a hardback print run as we possibly can. It's not affordable for us to split it up.

The keep and lifestyle rules in AW:Fallen Empires are the same as the ones in AW 2nd Ed, so, yes!

We do have a couple more previews planned. I'll see if I can get the vehicle and prosthetic rules onto a sheet to include with one of them, sure.

-Vincent

I'm a Patreon newb -- if we wanted to see more of the AW2 design process, how could we use that avenue to find it? I realized I had a lot a lot of "Oh man, what's behind THAT one?" but I didn't want to either demand essays of response or try to make you give away for free what you quite rightly realized people will pay for...

In terms of other stuff, I'm also super curious about vehicles. Power and Looks seem to only give you lists of adjectives, rather than anything number-based mechanical effect, and I wonder how defined the Hardholder fleets are (what is a "war vehicle" vs a "utility"

I've written very little about it for my Patreon, just given people some previews and released some playtest materials:
http://lumpley.com/index.php/window/installment/8
http://lumpley.com/index.php/window/installment/18

You might find some of the conversation threads interesting.

But really your best bet is to just ask. I'll answer what I can, and be polite about what I can't!

-Vincent

The Waterbearer.

Step into the Flow might very well be the most powerful move in Apocalypse World. Wow. I am in both terror and awe of that kind of power.

Between it and d-harm!

-Vincent

I love the look of the new version! AW has been my favourite game for the last few years, and this looks like a great addition. The Waterbearer is great, as well!

I have a question though, about highlighting stats. A lot of this applied in 1st ed too, but now that things are being updated it seems like a good point to ask:

Firstly, I've never been sure how Highlighting was really supposed to work. For example, maybe the Battlebabe's low Hard is something that interests me - she's not actually that tough, just cool. But if she's taken the right move, she'll never roll Hard unless there's a custom move in play that lets her - so am I being a dick by highlighting the stat that interests me but she can't choose to focus on? That seems worse in 2nd ed, since there are more chances to simply overwrite one stat with another - the Battlebabe can roll Cool for all Hard moves on the sheets, the Gunlugger can do the reverse, etc.

Secondly, doesn't that mean that there's a double incentive to take the stat-swapping moves? It not only lets you use a much better stat, but it means that if the good stat is highlighted, you'll get a lot more xp out of it. And if it is a dick move to highlight someone's swapped-out stat, that also means they are more likely to have the good one highlighted - there are less options for the other players to pick from.

And thirdly, now that manipulating a PC can strip highlights off them if they don't go along... that seems like a weird incentive to me. Firstly, towards the end of the session it becomes less meaningful since there'll be less chances to roll left. Secondly, if you refuse to be manipulated twice, there's no longer any penalty for refusing since you're out of highlights.

Maybe there's something about how highlights are meant to work that I've never gotten, but I was half-expecting the xp system to have changed for the new edition. Since it hasn't, figured I might as well ask.

Firstly, I've never been sure how Highlighting was really supposed to work. For example, maybe the Battlebabe's low Hard is something that interests me - she's not actually that tough, just cool. But if she's taken the right move, she'll never roll Hard unless there's a custom move in play that lets her - so am I being a dick by highlighting the stat that interests me but she can't choose to focus on? That seems worse in 2nd ed, since there are more chances to simply overwrite one stat with another - the Battlebabe can roll Cool for all Hard moves on the sheets, the Gunlugger can do the reverse, etc.

Highlighting a stat that someone *never* uses because of substitution is, yeah, usually a dick move; it's good form to ask the subject if there are stats they don't use. In 1e, it's not *totally* uncool to tell an Ice Cold Battlebabe to highlight hard; it means you want to see them try (and maybe fail) to Seize by Force. There might also be custom moves in play that aren't subject to stat substitutions; if the MC expects those moves to be relevant in a session, highlighting accordingly is okay.

Secondly, doesn't that mean that there's a double incentive to take the stat-swapping moves? It not only lets you use a much better stat, but it means that if the good stat is highlighted, you'll get a lot more xp out of it. And if it is a dick move to highlight someone's swapped-out stat, that also means they are more likely to have the good one highlighted - there are less options for the other players to pick from.

Yeah, all true. 

And thirdly, now that manipulating a PC can strip highlights off them if they don't go along... that seems like a weird incentive to me. Firstly, towards the end of the session it becomes less meaningful since there'll be less chances to roll left. Secondly, if you refuse to be manipulated twice, there's no longer any penalty for refusing since you're out of highlights.

I haven't seen how it plays out yet, but I really like the highlight-removal stick on Seduce/Manipulate. It's symmetrical with the XP-awarding carrot now, and much more clear in application than the "acting under fire" penalty of 1e. You're correct that the "weight" of it changes over the duration of a session.

If a PC is refusing manipulation-with-stick repeatedly, well, they're clearly a stubborn individual. Seems like a person who's stubbornly saying "no" repeatedly ought to find it easier and easier, while learning less and less. ;)

I've always thought that it's fairly reasonable to change stat highlighting to "move highlighting" - in other words, instead of highlighting your hard, you highlight any moves normally associated with that stat (go aggro and "seize" moves, for instance - since they're listed right by the "highlight" circle on the character sheet, it's not too hard to remember which). This can help bypass some of the problems of stat substitution moves and stat highlighting (where characters can't score XP, or score too much, and, as a result, the incentives stop working quite right).

However, this may be more challenging in 2nd Edition, especially depending on how the battle moves interact with stats and stat substitution moves.

Is there a particular reason that the Gunlugger only starts with two moves, now?  I recall discussion of balance in 1E, where the Battlebabe got +3 Cool because they functionally spent a move option on +1 Cool.  With the improved Ice Cold, the Battlebabe's +3 Cool, and the reduced number of moves a Gunlugger starts with, the Gunlugger's position as the baddest ass, as they're supposed to be, seems a bit more precarious, or possibly obsoleted.

An accident! It says 3 now.

-Vincent

I think there's a typo on the Child-Thing playbook - which I love, by the way.

But all the statlines give Weird +2, and there's an advance for +1Weird, max 2.

Vincent: the last Driver statline (Cool+2 Hard-2 Hot=0 Sharp+2 Weird+1) sums to +3, even though it has a second +2.

In the threats preview, under Essential Threats, i'm not getting how the gang/NPCs/vehicles part works.

"For any PCs' vehicles, create as vehicles." Does that mean create an external threat in vehicular form to drive vehicle-vs-vehicle combat? Or that the PC's vehicle itself is a threat?

I have a question about the Child Thing's The Mother's Heartbeat move. On a miss you lose track of time and many hours pass. Doesn't this essentially remove one of the PCs from play for that period? Such a scenario feels like it goes against AW's heart.
Would it be reasonable to make a Hard Move as the MC instead of doing the missing time, or is that miss condition really necessary for the move?

Korik1, create The Mother as a threat and then see if you feel the same way. It's just a specific version of the "Separate them." MC move, right? I think one of my players is excited to play The Child-Thing, how it will turn out in play I don't know.

There's an interesting realisation I'm having with all these playbooks. The Waterbearer's Source is a Threat. The Mother is a Threat. Heck, maybe The Faceless's mask is a Threat. I wonder why I didn't see it before?