Playbook advances - tiered plusses?

So my Hardholder changed playbook at the dusk of last session. We've never really had many Playbook-changes, but a thing that struck me now is that I have a couple of questions, especially since part of the reason we don't experience many playbook shifts is that come to many STATS+2 the endgame fast approaches and the MC get bored.  ::) ;)

So: I know you lose everything intrinsically to you old life and keep everything intrinsically connected to your self, but I was wondering if I took +1 WEIRD as a Hardholder, do I need to take a +1 advance from a Playbook that has two +1 WEIRD?

I know I probably needn't, and that we players can and should take responsibility for fiction and meta, but has anyone else thought about having a finite end of advances? ...maybe not endless STAT-change moves as well?


Also: I was wondering if I should ask my MC what he thinks about changing base statline to one from the Battlebabe. It would fit the character who's secret when Hx reset was that he hated being The Hardholder, having responsibility and dependents and always doing the hard choices.

I handle this in a VERY formulaic way:

When you change playbooks, remove all of your old playbooks moves including the stat+1's. Keep the stat+1s from your list of standard advancements. Now you become the other playbook with the stats you've got left.

Then, you may elect to pre-select advancements from the standard list that you want to keep. If you want a move, mark off a move from another playbook. If you already had a gang, workshop or followers: keep a smaller one by marking the option off your list. If the list does not allow for that advancement, then you cannot bring the move with you.

Done.

I do this because I like that you have to pay for your stuff, and it makes advancing more of a lateral-story driven move, rather than some EPIC LEVEL OF LOOT AND POWAH thing. Also it contains the late game to a certain power expectancy. No Gunlugger can be a better hardholder because they classed in, then someone who was a hardholder from the get go.

I like the clarity of that approach, and it makes good use of the playbook as reference material (you can look down at the sheet and immediately see what's available to you as an option and what's not).

I could see using that as a default to negotiate from, the next time someone switches playbooks. For some groups, having a "legal default" could be really useful.

What do you do when the stat +1's (from the list of Improvements) don't match from playbook to playbook? Let them keep them anyway? Or remove them, as you would if the option to lead a gang (say) wasn't part of the new playbook's Improvements?

Those are the only exception to the rule, they keep them regardless. If the stat IS listed, they don't have to mark it off either. I let those accumulate. So it is possible to get pretty high stats after a couple of character switches... but it's also possible to roll one stat for everything anyway, so I don't see that as a very big deal.

I think it's far more important to put a limit on active abilities since the moves are really what distinguishes everything. Although, one could tell a player to roll back EVERY advancement, however, I don't think that's at all necessary.

Thanks! This helped much! I'm meeting the MC a bit before next session and I am pretty sure he will enjoy the lateral (or maybe even regressive?) advancement. One problem we've had is that the end game approaches rapidly, with the feeling that the characters have much more to offer.

This time we've not thundered through to get XP, and it helps.

If you're looking to make the game longer too, you can always increase the number of experience required to level. Either by a flat rate of 7 or 10 per, or increase it with each level: so like 5 exp for your first advancement, 6 for the next, then 7, and so on. I've done games where each was tried, and they all changed how quickly people leveled. Then again, 5 is a really solid number, so we pretty much decided to stick with it.