|
Fenarisk posted:Personally I think the wizard and cleric are a little under powered, but that's me. I'd say go with The Mage and The Initiate so they drop the spell lists and feel more Dungeon Worldy. I am just the kind of person who would do this sort of thing. And you should never kick out a player unless they're being a complete dickbag, creeper, or have jacked your poo poo. Him being adamant in not wanting to play D-World isn't a worthy enough offense. Ask him what he likes to play but could never quite make work in his game of choice, if he has a pet concept in mind or a favorite character from Pathfinder or whatever the gently caress other game he wants to play. Help him bring that character to life and just get him involved. Anybody will play anything if you make the session fun enough (or have good enough food/drink/drugs as a bonus). MadRhetoric fucked around with this message at 03:19 on May 29, 2013 |
#
?
May 29, 2013 03:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 08:05 |
|
|
TheDemon posted:A good 70%+ of the moves you make are the basic moves, even as a caster. If anything I found the wizard and the cleric a little underpowered, since their spells are really focused on support, but frankly the game seems to lack class balance problems entirely. Something about the structure and flow of the game under a fair DM results in a pretty equal playing field; that's probably because there are no real restrictions on what any single PC can do. That is to say, the movelist triggers from what the players do, not the other way around. So players are explicitly not limited by their moves. Rather, they're limited by In Character knowledge or lack of it, their environment, IC personalities and inclinations, and the physics and other natural laws of the setting. I think that the biggest danger of imbalance in PbtA games is a louder or more imaginative player dominating the game. This can be handled by good GMing and turning to other players and asking them what they do. While having limited spells per day does limit how much the basic Wizard can use it's signature move, but you always have Ritual, which is an amazing move for getting things done, and creating exciting situations. Another factor that negates class supremacy is that failures drive the fiction just as much as the successes. Some classes may read as more 'boring' than others, the basic Fighter is an example where the main moves not being as fictionally exciting since a lot of them revolbve around doing more damage, and damage is such a small part of the game.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 03:28
|
|
|
aldantefax posted:The Player Agenda Here's version 2, likely the final pass unless someone else has any other suggestions on what to put in.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
I should probably share this preview over here, for those of you who do not follow the Kickstarter thread:gnome7 posted:
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
It's Fighter Week over in the DW G+ community so I wrote up two magic items for magic item Tuesday: "Sword", +1 - This sword was used to slay a [person/place/thing] (what?). - This weapon [started/ended] a [great event] (where?) - This sword is [hot/cold] to the touch (why?). - The [blade/blades] of this weapon are [righteous/wicked]! - This sword is [famous/infamous] for a reason... - The blade sings in your dreams of a [relative weapon] - without it, it will never be complete... "Shovel", +1 - This shovel was once used to bury a great figure (who?). - It was used in an unconventional manner (what?). - You think as a weapon, this would be pretty [messy/vicious/brutal]... - [Monster type] is afraid of this shovel (why?). - You feel [emotion] when holding this shovel here (where?). - You traded [something ephemeral] for this shovel, and you [do/don't] regret it (which?). - This shovel holds a [secret] [power/thing/purpose]... For anybody who wants to create some stuff, here's the proposed schedule: quote:Monday - introduction, brainstorming (why are you THE fighter, signature weapon options etc.)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
Okay, this is me trying to put into words my beef with the Mage spellcasting as opposed to the Wizard's. I know that a lot of you are having fun with the Mage, and I'm not denying that, but trying to explain why it doesn't gel with me. It's not grounded in a specific action. Like all good moves, it starts and ends with the fiction, and it's grounded in a concrete action. I mean, you can't just say "I use magic to solve this problem!", you have to describe how. But whenever you do anything that counts as "attempting to solve a problem with magic", you roll that move. That's not… specific enough for me, I guess. Hack and slash doesn't say "when you attempt to solve a problem by melee combat". Shapeshifting doesn't say "when you attempt to solve a problem by shifting into animal form". The one move that's as generic is Defy Danger, and it highlights what Mage casting is missing (for me). In one end it's generic since the danger to be defied isn't specified in the move, just like the problem to be solved isn't in the casting move. On the other end, "how do you do it", Defy Danger provides categories (like "… by powering through") etc. Mage casting is generic in both ends. The player freely describes how they go about solving, and doesn't change anything in the move. (For reference, using this classification wizard casting is (very) specific in the solution but doesn't assume any problem at all. You could cast a wizard spell even when there wouldn't be any apparent problem to solve.) Also, unlike Defy Danger where their description is grounded in the fiction very concretely since they can only do things that make sense (so no leaping over buildings), Mage casting can choose from anything at all accomplishable by magic as long as it's not in their opposed elements. This means that the Mage's "Cast a spell" move has no internal sense of scale. Defying Danger limits what you can do based on who you are physically. A fighter could plausibly power through a horde of Goblins while a halfling Thief could only power through a swarm of rats, and neither of them could ever (use that move to) power through hewn stone walls. This is fair to everyone since everyone agrees on the power scales of physical feats. Wizard casting also works, since the spells clearly include scales. And we get level progression along that power scale, too! At first level, "plausible for a magician of your sort" clearly includes summoning one spirit for one question. At fifth level, you can summon a monster to fight by your side. At ninth level, you can summon anyone to your side by teleport! In contrast, all things described as "problems" that magic could solve are not equal in my mind. This includes the problem of a Mage attempting to solve super-epic problems - and the move would trigger, right? It also includes the other end of the scale, where the Mage wants to do some small prestidigitation. The Wizard does not make that much easier than other spells, granted, but it does differentiate in some way - easier spells are easier to keep memorised, so keeping it in your array isn't as much of a sacrifice as keeping a high-level spell. Move-wise, I won't say the Mage only has a hammer and thus everything looks like a nail, but… all the Mage's tools look like a hammer and they're definitely all the same size, regardless of the size of the problem. So I guess two problems: - the lack of a sense of scale - it's generic in both ends (both what the problem is, and what your solution is)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 07:27
|
|
|
A spell compendium for the Wizard/Cleric is a really bad idea. Much like D&D, their strength lies in being able to magic their way out of situations. They may not be good in direct combat but that's not the point; their magic is invaluable. Giving them more spells (and thus more versatility) only serves to make them more powerful, which they don't currently need.aldantefax posted:It's Fighter Week over in the DW G+ community so I wrote up two magic items for magic item Tuesday These are a really good way of doing "mundane" magical items. gnome7 posted:I should probably share this preview over here, for those of you who do not follow the Kickstarter thread: Related to this, what changes did you make to the playbooks exactly? A changelist would be cool.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 08:13
|
|
|
I have a move written up for a playbook called the explorer, I like the move as it is but I can't word it well to save my life. Can anyone think of a better way to phrase this? Fame and Glory When you return from an adventure with proof of a major discovery, beaten villan, or priceless artifact and present it to the authorities, mark XP
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 08:18
|
|
|
axelsoar posted:I have a move written up for a playbook called the explorer, I like the move as it is but I can't word it well to save my life. Can anyone think of a better way to phrase this? It's worded perfectly fine, but XP moves are generally a bad idea. They're boring, and they either have an effect really infrequently or allow the character to level up much faster than others. There's a reason Alignment moves are DW's XP moves. That said, "present a major discovery to the authorities" is a great Lawful alignment move.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 08:27
|
|
|
It's also kind of just a rewording of the XP questions in Level Up. Taking a whole advance just to get an extra XP every once in a while is really bad, and as a core move it's still kind of boring. Instead of gaining XP, maybe have it promise you some kind of significant reward, or a grand favor. Something more than just some more XP.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 08:32
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:It's worded perfectly fine, but XP moves are generally a bad idea. They're boring, and they either have an effect really infrequently or allow the character to level up much faster than others. There's a reason Alignment moves are DW's XP moves. That's fair enough, I was just worried the fiction trigger was too wordy. My main hang-up now is which pun-tastic name to go with for another move, it is either going to be "Man of many talents" or "Journeyman". sentrygun posted:It's also kind of just a rewording of the XP questions in Level Up. Taking a whole advance just to get an extra XP every once in a while is really bad, and as a core move it's still kind of boring. Instead of gaining XP, maybe have it promise you some kind of significant reward, or a grand favor. Something more than just some more XP. I forgot to mention, but this is again for the system I am working on with Mr. Damage Control atm, and it uses a different way of doling out XP. instead of having a set list of questions, each PC has their own set of questions, 2 of which come from a list on the playbook and the other is under development. The Tactician for example chooses 2 of the following. Achieve victory without violence. Defy the odds. Make a valuable ally. Match wits with a worthy foe. Ash Rose fucked around with this message at 08:44 on May 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 08:35
|
|
|
I don't find the mage overpowered at all, because in Dungeon World, you can hit the mage. My party's mage is an astrologer elf who worships the stars and commands the weather. Even though she's level 6, she almost died last session when a dude in platemail grabbed her and gave her a solid headbutt. Mages in DW don't have wards, contingencies, miss percentages and summons. They have their wits, their books and their spells. (And if your players are like mine, they'll forget to use their books. If you're making an equipment page that has books, explain what they do or your players will use'em as monster bait).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 09:03
|
|
|
Rocket Ace posted:2. he also hated the open ended feeling of the rules (his example was: travel - there are rules for success and partial success but nothing for failure). Obviously those are just the most obvious outcomes I can think of, but if the circumstances are special failure can act as a trigger for almost any kind of a move (including an environmental move, monster move or maybe even a move from one of your Dangers).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 09:51
|
|
|
In fact, there is an explicit list of GM moves, a fairly explicit division between soft and hard moves, and explicit rules for what happens on a failure or partial success (the GM gets to make a move). The failure rules are as clear as can be.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 10:10
|
|
|
One thing I've tried to emphasize when describing the game is that on a 6- the GM can make any move they want, including success. Obviously success with consequences, or success along with some DIRE loving HAPPENINGS, but it is by no means required that the PC fail at what they were trying to do. One simple example would be letting the action succeed as intended, and looking at your fronts for a nice Grim Portent to smack the PCs with on the other side of the door or whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 10:11
|
|
|
His opinion has changed since I directed him to the GM section, and the moves therein. He tends to gloss over GM sections because they usually only contain general DM tips and rules that he believes a good gm would come up with on his own. Kind of ironic, actually, that his complaint was that there were too many gaps in the rules. I think his confusion comes with the expectation that this is an homage to old school dnd. He was an avid 2nd ed player, and we know how many god drat tables and charts sit with that system. Those moves are pretty neat. This is probably one of the most elegantly simple systems I've ever encountered. Rocket Ace fucked around with this message at 11:22 on May 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 11:20
|
|
|
aldantefax posted:"Shovel", +1 Is this a Shovel Knight reference? Because now I want to play Shovel Knight.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 12:25
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:I don't find the mage overpowered at all, because in Dungeon World, you can hit the mage. My party's mage is an astrologer elf who worships the stars and commands the weather. Even though she's level 6, she almost died last session when a dude in platemail grabbed her and gave her a solid headbutt. sentrygun posted:And not a lot of people like the spell concept in the first place, thus why we're not seeing a bunch or any classes with Cast a Spell variants. MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 14:22 on May 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 13:59
|
|
|
Rocket Ace posted:His opinion has changed since I directed him to the GM section, and the moves therein. This is one of those things where DW does require a bit of unlearning for people who are hard set in their assumptions about RPGs: because most RPGs put all the rules on the players' side and assume that the GM simply makes use of those rules, a game where the GM actually has their own set of rules to play with is so novel that many GMs will miss it on their first reading. Most people are used to the idea that GM's sections are simply guidelines for running the game so they ignore those sections completely, which in the case of games like DW can easily lead to the mistaken perception that the rules are incomplete. This is one of those things where I think DW is in the right: the GM section isn't just guidelines for running the game, it's actually reaching you to run the game by framing good GMing as rules instead of wishy-washy guidelines.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 14:01
|
|
|
Ratpick posted:This is one of those things where I think DW is in the right: the GM section isn't just guidelines for running the game, it's actually reaching you to run the game by framing good GMing as rules instead of wishy-washy guidelines. Hell yes. This game is definitely changing my views on GMing, regardless of ruleset. In the same way as WFRP 3rd edition got me to use trackers, party sheets and free flow initiative (everyone rolls initiative as usual, but the players choose WHO gets to act on each phase, rather than a strict order). 'course there isn't really any combat initiative in this game, is there?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 14:52
|
|
|
Tendales posted:One thing I've tried to emphasize when describing the game is that on a 6- the GM can make any move they want, including success. Obviously success with consequences, or success along with some DIRE loving HAPPENINGS, but it is by no means required that the PC fail at what they were trying to do. My favorite example of this came from my first Dungeon World session. There was a goblin riding on top of a giant ogre, and he had a big bottle of rum with him. They were fighting in the middle of the forest, right outside the entrance to a dungeon they just cleared. The Ranger wanted to shoot the bottle with a fire arrow, potentially setting both the goblin and ogre on fire, and I said, "Sure! Go for it, roll +DEX." In my head, I'd already mapped out what would happen - on a 7-9, the bottle would break, and they'd both catch fire and fly into a rage (but still be on fire). On a 10+, the bottle would explode, taking out the little goblin rider. But then she rolled a 4. So, in that case, I had the arrow still hit directly, but it caught on the rum bottle's handle, knocking it off into the distance... and causing a big ol' forest fire, and sending the goblin into a rage anyway because his rum was gone. The Ranger still succeeded - she shot the rum directly and caused a fire, it just went way worse than she'd expected it to.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 15:07
|
|
|
ElegantFugue posted:Is this a Shovel Knight reference? Because now I want to play Shovel Knight. Sort of. It is a GURPS reference to a Dungeon Fantasy magic item that is a kickin' rad shovel!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 15:39
|
|
|
Here's some bonds for Fighter Week - Wednesday: - I fought [with/against] [Character] in [the war]. - [Characters X, Y, Z] and I share [a promise stronger than blood] of [honor/fealty/dying on the same day/brotherhood]. - I owe [Character] my [freedom] from [thralldom/prison/death/life]. - (scary!) I will only die by [Player Character]'s hand.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
Those bonds are odd; you can't develop half of those without dying (and in DW, dying is serious business)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Those bonds are odd; you can't develop half of those without dying (and in DW, dying is serious business) Perhaps they could count if you make a deal with Death and come back (technically dying).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Those bonds are odd; you can't develop half of those without dying (and in DW, dying is serious business) No? A bond is resolved when both players agree that it is no longer relevant to their characters. The only one that might maybe require you to die is the last one, and only if you manage to fail in finding a way of making it obsolete that doesn't involve dying (e.g. character B swearing they'll never harm character A).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
Yeah, a bond being resolved doesn't mean the thing the bond says happens. In fact, it's quite the opposite: if the thing in the bond happens and keeps happening, it remains relevant to you and your bond buddy and your bond doesn't change. If the thief keeps jumping in and offing you before anything else can, you'll still only die by their hands, but if you decide "wow wait why did I agree to this" then you can flip the thief the bird and tell him next time he tries to pull that poo poo he's going facefirst into your fist then you changed the bond! If anything they're fairly extreme for starting bonds, but even that's fine. Just because you've got nowhere to go but up doesn't mean you have to start at the bottom.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
That reminds me, I asked a few pages ago when everyone was posting playbooks but it didn't get any attention. What kind of deals with Death have you guys done in your games? I found it hard to think of 7-9 Last Breath results on the fly, it would be nice to have a bit of a bank to draw on. Do you relate it to the manner of death? Setting arbitrary goals for characters that could plausibly come from Death itself seem tricky to pull off well
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Boing posted:That reminds me, I asked a few pages ago when everyone was posting playbooks but it didn't get any attention. What kind of deals with Death have you guys done in your games? I found it hard to think of 7-9 Last Breath results on the fly, it would be nice to have a bit of a bank to draw on. Do you relate it to the manner of death? Setting arbitrary goals for characters that could plausibly come from Death itself seem tricky to pull off well To start coming up with ideas for deals with Death, first try to think about what Death really wants. This will vary from game to game, but some general points about Death could be that he hates when souls are stolen from his realm (through resurrection, interdimensional prison breaks, etc), perhaps he despises any and all attempts at immortality, or maybe he's just a fan of death and suffering in general. Once you get a basic idea of what Death's all about, it gets a bit easier to come up with deals he might make. Kill the lich who has made an attempt at immortality, destroy the altar at the cathedral where resurrections are performed, break the old man's prism which he uses to trap souls and prevent them from crossing over. A great way to remind the player of their deal is to mark the character's body with Death's emblem. Maybe some common folk or superstitious individuals recognize it and act accordingly. And if the character ignores or fail to fulfill their end of the bargain, well, Death's mark might serve as a beacon for his wraiths... I've had success with this, and my players have had a lot of fun with it. Speaking of, ask your players! Talk with them about what Death is after and what an appropriate bargain might be.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 21:13
|
|
|
Boing posted:That reminds me, I asked a few pages ago when everyone was posting playbooks but it didn't get any attention. What kind of deals with Death have you guys done in your games? I found it hard to think of 7-9 Last Breath results on the fly, it would be nice to have a bit of a bank to draw on. Do you relate it to the manner of death? Setting arbitrary goals for characters that could plausibly come from Death itself seem tricky to pull off well I haven't had a player roll for Last Breath yet, but I've actually given this some thought. The thing is, on a 7-9 on a Last Breath you still want the player to feel the consequences of death, and a deal with Death should be one that actually makes the player think hard about whether they want to take the deal or accept death. A deal of "Someone else must die in your place" is not interesting and hard to pull off, because the PCs are still assumed to be murderhobos and doing a lot of killing anyway. A deal of "[Insert friendly NPC here] has defied me before and must die in your place" not only reveals something interesting about the world and the people in it, but also gives the player a hard choice, and should the player take the deal it will drive the narrative forward in interesting ways. On that note, I've been thinking of the system of Dungeon World a lot, and I've been able to dissect this from the basic and advanced moves: On a 10+ the character succeeds at whatever they set out to do and it should have the appropriate mechanical effects based on the narrative. (i.e. a 10+ on Hack and Slash has you deal your damage, because that's what is going on in the narrative.) On a 7-9 the character succeeds at whatever they set out to do, but an appropriate GM move triggers, but with player input. The aforementioned Last Breath move, on a 7-9, triggers the move "Tell them the requirements and consequences and ask," while the Cleric and Wizard's Cast A Spell move on a 7-9 triggers either "Put someone in a spot" or "Use up their resources". (for the purposes of this move, a -1 ongoing counts as using up their resources) On a 6- the character fails at whatever they set out to do, and the appropriate GM move (as hard as the GM thinks appropriate) triggers. This is obviously not a definitive "anatomy of a move," but since I've read a lot of talk about using Defy Danger as the Dungeon World version of a standard resolution mechanic, I thought I'd share this little train of thought of mine. For me at least it's helped in adjudicating those moments when I fall back on Defy Danger to resolve things in the narrative that feel like they should have room for interesting success and/or failure, but that don't have an exact move for them.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
I totally agree with the scale issue with the mage. Whenever I've played one, which thusfar has been limited to multiclassing, I limit my own scale and let the "affect much more than you intended" take care of accidental massive scale stuff. But the less subtle magics really lend themselves to going out of proportion, especially when the spell caster aggressively goes after something big. I don't really think the scale issue has anything to do with power level though, it has everything to do with being able to affect completely different things than the rest of the party. That doesn't necessarily give it better problem-solving ability, because a lot of things you need to solve in DW are nice and personal, but it means that problems the party has and problems the mage have become separated. A better trigger might be "When you change the nature of the nearby world by weaving a spell", just as an example. Make no mistake, I love the class and the scale thing has never been a problem in our games, but even so whenever one of us goes "I cast a spell!" everyone else goes "oh nooooooooooo" and jokes about what kind of danger they're going to have to defy this time MadScientistWorking posted:Honestly, Tiger is right though. The only real sane way I found to adjudicate the Mage was to effectively turn it into a potential walking nuclear bomb because as Tiger said there is no sense of scale with that class. Admittedly, its actually incredibly fun but on the other hand I don't think there is any other class that really has that weird limitless potential that it has like accidentally creating such a natural disaster that the Perilous Journey move activated even though they had to move 500 ft. That 500 foot Perilous Journey was perhaps my favorite roll failure ever, mind you. TheDemon fucked around with this message at 00:20 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 23:37
|
|
|
Fenarisk posted:Personally I think the wizard and cleric are a little under powered, but that's me. I'd say go with The Mage and The Initiate so they drop the spell lists and feel more Dungeon Worldy. You should totally play the Initiate, but it's not a priest in any sense of the term. I think you want The Priest. Initiate's a martial artist. (And it's not a monk, necessarily. But that's me and my pet peeve over 'monk' being used by D&D and other games to mean 'martial artist' when it's really a much more specific thing.)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
Isn't all the super power mage stuff handled by ritual?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
Can anyone clarify how the -1 ongoing from the cleric and wizard spellcasting 7-9 result works for me? Can it be nabbed multiple times and stack, or is it like, once you pick this, pick other choices going forward?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
Are there any good Con- or Str-based moves that would fit in with a Survivor? I'm looking for something more active to flesh him out. I'm eyeing Monster Hunter (even though it's Int) from the Slayer and turn him into a bit of a dragon-hunter for our Crescent Isle campaign.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 01:01
|
|
|
Heart Attacks posted:Can anyone clarify how the -1 ongoing from the cleric and wizard spellcasting 7-9 result works for me? Can it be nabbed multiple times and stack, or is it like, once you pick this, pick other choices going forward? I think the move specifically says you can only drop it to +1. So you can stack it to that point. I added a house rule that if they wanted an ongoing effect they took a -1 that was not effected by that cap.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 01:12
|
|
|
I'm looking at this:quote:When you release a spell you’ve prepared, roll+Int. ✴On a 10+, the spell is successfully cast and you do not forget the spell—you may cast it again later. ✴On a 7-9, the spell is cast, but choose one: The only place I can find that specifies that ongoing penalties or bonuses are cumulative though is on the 'clumsy' tag. Edit: So I guess the question could just be clarified to, "Are ongoing penalties and bonuses cumulative?"
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
Here is the Merchant Prince PDF, all combined and ready to go. Desty, if you have any names or looks you'd like me to edit in just let me know. http://www.mediafire.com/view/x45d15whk3cl6m2/The_Merchant_Prince.pdf
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
You can stack the negative ongoing effect. You get progressively worse and are more likely to roll 6- results, so it's not like stacking the negative is unfair. Demon's thinking of the Mage, which has an entirely different move with the exact same name.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 08:05 |
|
|
Posting this because it got in my head and I need it out so I can work on the May Design Contest instead. New compendium class that lets you play a werewolf, Venom, a Psion who looked too deeply into the abyss, etc.quote:The Symbiont:
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 02:51
|
|