how the stats balance

Only the gods are perfect!

Oh, I'm aware. I'm just wondering how they should be amended, or if you decided to leave them that way for balance reasons or something along those lines.

NINJA EDIT: The gods are perfect? Even that sounds awfully idealistic for you, Vincent.

I don't remember whether I had a good reason, so I'd have to do some serious reverse engineering and rethinking to decide whether and how to change them. It's very possible that there's a good reason, having to do with the fundamental asymmetry of the stats and how those two playbooks in particular fit into it.

Feel free to change them yourself if you decide to, but I'd just play with them as is. (And do, in fact.) Being 1 stat point down isn't the worst thing ever. Clearly that driver's player decided that the stat line was worth it for other reasons, right?

For the Hard, yes; she's a combat driver. (It appears to be the only Driver line with Hard+1. Hard is a pretty damn powerful stat, as I learned playing Daryl the Muscle who is a bloody fucking runaway freight train who has been described as a "murderous gorilla" by her enemies and a "monster" by her own goddamn employer) so I could see that being the reason--but none of the other playbooks put that kind of premium on Hard. Then again, none of the other playbooks are driving a 3-armour tank with 3-harm close/far area machine guns strapped to the sides that also gives them a +2 on aggro/seize rolls, so that might be a loaded comparison.

The Operator, however, doesn't appear to have anything remotely like that going on. The stat line is kind of boring and doesn't really have anything that seems to be at a premium (just Cool+2 Hard=0 Hot=0 Sharp+1 Weird-1). It couldn't be that it's a line with Sharp+1, as the Operator gets other stat lines with good Sharp and no such premium. It's also not that it gets a penalty to neither Hard nor Hot, as there's an Operator line that actually gets +1 to both of those (and it's the only Operator line that gets a positive Hard, and it doesn't even have a Sharp penalty, just the same Weird penalty 3/4 of the Operator lines do--Cool+2 Hard+1 Hot+1 Sharp=0 Weird-1). I could see balance reasons to put a higher premium on Hard+1 for the Driver, but the Operator line genuinely comes off as in error, unless there's something I'm missing.

I remember that about the driver! Yes, the driver's stat line is correct. Otherwise the driver could start play with Hard+4.

The operator looks like an error to me too. My advice is: choose one of the other stat lines, or a dumb error on the designer's part will screw you out of 1 stat point.

I remember that about the driver! Yes, the driver's stat line is correct. Otherwise the driver could start play with Hard+4.

Could it? I know it could get up to Hard+4 (in their vehicle) inside of one advancement, but I wasn't aware it could start that way (small difference). I was thinking a stat point added into that line would be in Cool, Hot, or Weird (Cool seems appropriate for a combat driver), not bumping Hard up to +2, which would actually unbalance it again by the standard Driver formula.

(Brief off-topic Driver Q: Is the power+2 looks+2 0-armour weakness+1 car stat line supposed to be a motorcycle?)

The operator looks like an error to me too. My advice is: choose one of the other stat lines, or a dumb error on the designer's part will screw you out of 1 stat point.

Push MC to make a hard move, MC disclaims responsibility instead. Ain't that the nature of the beast. *fistshake*

(Brief off-topic Driver Q: Is the power+2 looks+2 0-armour weakness+1 car stat line supposed to be a motorcycle?)

That is certainly what I would use this for. It doesn't need to be exclusive though, after all the chopper's bike profile includes 1-armor so there is no reason a driver's bike couldn't have armour too. I think this profile would work also for cars like dune buggys and the like.

On the topic of stat balance, I'm curious about the Quarantine.  He seems to average out to +4 if you ignore the weirdness about his weird.  Are the generally suboptimal results for his weird supposed to be a net negative?

Vincent,

I'd love to hear why some playbooks get 2 moves and some get 3. In some cases, I can see various other factors accounting for "balance", but in others I can't (e.g. the Skinner). Will you still speak about this sometime? Or have you already?

I'd love to hear why some playbooks get 2 moves and some get 3. In some cases, I can see various other factors accounting for "balance", but in others I can't (e.g. the Skinner). Will you still speak about this sometime? Or have you already?

I'm not Vincent, but the Skinner's special is crazy powerful, and their hot+2 base makes it a reliable tool.

I don't remember particulars about the skinner. I can say a couple of things:

I deliberated long and hard about every playbook, whether it gets 2 moves or 3 moves to start (or some other number). The question I always asked myself is: "given everything else here, are 2 moves enough to create a whole starting character, or does it need to be 3?" I don't know if I can say any more about the idea of "a whole starting character," but that's what I went by.

The specials are all totally exempt from any of my balancing considerations. Basically I considered the characters as though they would never have sex, and then added their sex moves once they were otherwise complete.

-Vincent

Thanks!

Some deliberate thought + gut feeling works as an explanation for me.

Fascinating reading all these "under the hood" discussions about the system and design decisions. Thanks for being so accessible, Vincent

Sure thing!

-Vincent