Two questions about playbook based on vengeance

I'm working on a playbook for someone or something that comes back from the dead to avenge a hideous wrong. A playbook where the Earth has vomited up a walking lump of flesh because she can not abide the injustice upon her face. A playbook tied to Sharp, to marking people for justice and hunting them down.

Two questions. Firstly, I feel like the name "The Revenant" has too much pop culture currency right now. Is there another name which says the same thing but is less obvious?

Secondly. This is more nebulous, and it ties into what Eonas was writing in the Kickstarter thread about PC Wolves of the Maelstrom having such strong and antagonistic motivations. Does anyone have any experience with playbooks and characters whose motivations are entirely at odds with the rest of the player characters? I'm thinking of The Space Marine Mammal, which I never got a chance to play with. Clearly there were options for integrating into the rest of humanity (ahh, sweet, sweet dolphin sex.) but the initial set up just gave the character a bucket-load of incentive to go off on their own and do entirely their own thing. Is that a problem? Am I overly worried? Are there tricks to keep characters interacting?

The Draugr
The Bride
The man with no name
The Redemption
The Avenger

Revenant is probably okay despite its current, uh, currency. If I were making it, though, I'd call it the Crow.

I think it's pretty important in AW to keep characters connected to one another. For this character conception in particular, you should also ask yourself what they're going to do when they finish hunting down their targets. I suppose you could pace the campaign so that they keep uncovering enemies behind their enemies until they reach Ungiven Future; either changing playbooks or retiring to a safe quiet grave would make sense at that point.

As an Hx-establishment question, you could have the avenger ask "which one of you are in danger from my enemies," giving them an initial connection to another PC, but that requires another player to put themselves at risk to buy into your story arc, which is asking a lot.

"Which of you once allied with my enemies?" Would be another point of interest for Hx. Bonus points if the same person answers both of the questions!

Tbh, if I (usually a Battlebabe or Gunlugger) had the opportunity to fight something so evil and badass that another player came back from the dead to stab, I'd jump at the chance. Just sayin'.

#1 -- I would say that the naming convention should reflect the content of the playbook. So if you see it taking on a specific theme, barth forth apocalyptica related to the theme. Also if you feel that your theme seems too diverse from the other needs and wants of the play-books, don't stop yourself from going back and refactoring it until it isn't.

Names: Haunt (maybe location specific rather then hunter), Returned (maybe there are contingencies on the return that force... abhorrent behavior), Ghoul (a focus on the morbid), Cadaver (maybe it's less about being a specific person, and something more like a body-jumping essence). Depends on the theme, I like many the previously mentioned too, including revenant. Also: The Morgue.

#2 -- I might say that you should take a strong look at the faceless, it is already focused basically on the same thing as your stated intent here. It wouldn't take much to either take insights from its design, or just just use it as your design. The Faceless could easily be "converted" into a back-from-the-dead vengeance seeker, I might go as far as to say it already is.

Worthy Mentions: Be careful having a Sharp based class, there are very good design reasons why the actual play-books moved away from this stat. It is already universally useful and universally powerful. Allowing someone to sit on top of it like a Battlebabe on cool or the Gunlugger on hard is asking for them to be much more potent then you might expect. Having any character based around revenge is already placing a lot of emphasis on Hard. Undead and Sharp don't tend to mix conceptually, if you consider that their interactions with other people will be colored by disgust or wariness. Sharp != Detective. Weird / opening your brain is a better sleuthy. You might want to take a look through the other playbooks, The Grotesque in particular might offer some cool insights, it managed to be an isolated playbook while at the same time offering a lot of interaction.  Either way, Good luck in your pursuits, I hope you figure something out that's cool for you and your table.

Thanks for your comments everyone. Still mulling it over. The Crow is certainly an inspiration, though it gets referenced in the Moves.  I hadn't considered the universal utility of Sharp. And apparently I don't have a copy of The Grotesque, which seems odd given how much of Avery's other stuff I've got lying around.

I'll post something from the playbook shortly.

The Crow is certainly an inspiration, though it gets referenced in the Moves.

Please tell me that the name of this move is "Caw! Caw! BANG! Fuck, I'm dead!"

You may also want to look at The Damned playbook, because it has some interesting parallels as well.