|
Has anyone created an Elementalist playbook yet? Specifically, we're gearing up for a campaign that's going to be starting in a couple weeks and one of the players has indicated he'd like to play a character with powers similar to the Earthbenders in Avatar: The Last Airbender. I think the Mage could probably work in a pinch, but I've already got one player who's been looking at the Mage and I don't want the players to feel like their characters are less unique because they're both playing the same class (which might be a silly concern).
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
MagnesiumB posted:Has anyone created an Elementalist playbook yet? Specifically, we're gearing up for a campaign that's going to be starting in a couple weeks and one of the players has indicated he'd like to play a character with powers similar to the Earthbenders in Avatar: The Last Airbender. I think the Mage could probably work in a pinch, but I've already got one player who's been looking at the Mage and I don't want the players to feel like their characters are less unique because they're both playing the same class (which might be a silly concern). Lantern from Inverse World, with the Light reflavored to a combination of The Spirits and an element of their choosing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 21:03
|
|
|
MagnesiumB posted:I've already got one player who's been looking at the Mage and I don't want the players to feel like their characters are less unique because they're both playing the same class (which might be a silly concern). Otherwise there'd be a lot of duplication in problem solving methods (just imagine having two Wizards, both with Ritual -- it'd be completely redundant). It's why I also don't allow anyone to take multiclass moves that anyone else already has.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 21:09
|
|
|
LowellDND posted:For fiction creation, my group stole something from Fiasco. We all have a stack of 3x5 cards, and when we have an idea, we write it and toss the card in the center, and it becomes canon. It's a nice ritual feeling to it. It doesn't even has to rewrite reality; one of my cards was that the dwarves believed that the cloud giants stole the sun, and above the clouds is the Eternal Sunlit lands. No idea if its true yet. I have started doing this in all of my games, although the inspiration was FATE rather than Fiasco. But still, I can also report that it's really awesome for keeping important plot and settings points top of mind for everyone involved. I do it not just for fiction things, but transient things like "we know the patrol routes" or "the enemy is prepared for us coming". It is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
So I tried this out the other day with a group of friends and I wasn't as enthused with it as I thought I'd be. I really like the mechanics and the ability for the PC's to do awesome stuff on a regular basis but I found out that I'm not great with coming up with EVERYTHING on the fly. Is it wrong for me to do more prep work than the manual tells me to? I felt a little naked without my prepped stuff. Would you all recommend a different system or should I give this another shot?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
You can do prep work. There isn't really any issue with that - I find it's best to prep challenges (combat, obstacles, objectives, whatever) and let the system shine by seeing how the players decide to solve them. The whole less prep thing is basically that you don't need to do prep work, but you sure can do as much as you like if that suits you and your group better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
From reading (not yet playing, but I'm planning that) the idea is more that you prep a location in motion, and let the PCs go nuts on it. Don't prep a story, prep some groups of people (or whatever; I have in mind for my campaign a cult who are trying to wake a dragon, and an angry dragon who just wants to loving sleep TYVM; it's an undeveloped idea at present but I think I could take it somewhere) who are doing bad stuff and see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 00:38
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:You can do prep work. There isn't really any issue with that - I find it's best to prep challenges (combat, obstacles, objectives, whatever) and let the system shine by seeing how the players decide to solve them. The whole less prep thing is basically that you don't need to do prep work, but you sure can do as much as you like if that suits you and your group better. thespaceinvader posted:From reading (not yet playing, but I'm planning that) the idea is more that you prep a location in motion, and let the PCs go nuts on it. Don't prep a story, prep some groups of people (or whatever; I have in mind for my campaign a cult who are trying to wake a dragon, and an angry dragon who just wants to loving sleep TYVM; it's an undeveloped idea at present but I think I could take it somewhere) who are doing bad stuff and see what happens. OK cool, your responses make me feel better. I'm going to have a little more prepared for next time and see how it goes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 01:00
|
|
|
I've had great luck running actual published modules using AW/DW. I'm just taking them as resources with maps, plots, some NPC, and a general setup. Then let the players go nuts. My DW group had me just about convinced they were going to derail completely on the third page of the game thread. I just rolled with it to see what would happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 01:50
|
|
|
Looselybased posted:OK cool, your responses make me feel better. I'm going to have a little more prepared for next time and see how it goes. If the problem is that you're not sure what to do when they roll that 6- or 7-9, that's not unusual for a new group! This game uses a lot of different muscles than man other games, so it can take you a little longer to build that improv muscle up. Feel free to flip it back on to the players with a question. "We'll, sure, you've swung off the chandelier and kicked the baron in the face, but something's gone wrong - terribly wrong! What were you hoping didn't happen?" If its a case of filling the world up with stuff on the fly that's proving tricky, questions can be the answer again. Something I love about DW is that you don't just have one mind to build the world from, and world building doesn't stop once the game starts. Write up a few threats, perhaps stat up a few adversaries or ideas for exciting ad dangerous scenes, and then write a buttload of questions about the world, the dangers and points of interest in it, and how all this relates to your players. Plunder your players' imaginations to build the world - not only does this lighten the load on you, but it gets everyone more involved and excited about the world. Some small prep and questions not only lightens your load and excites your players, it focuses them by making what you've got prepared matter to them! You might have something like: Circle of warlocks ad their dark ritual What connection does the wizard have to the circle? What dark ritual are the warlocks trying to prepare? Why do they think they must perform this ritual? What will happen if they complete the ritual? What do the warlocks need to complete the ritual? Some questions you will ask the players, some questions will be answered during play, and some you will answer yourself when the time is right. madadric fucked around with this message at 03:12 on Jun 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 01:51
|
|
|
madadric posted:If the problem is that you're not sure what to do when they roll that 6- or 7-9, that's not unusual for a new group! This game uses a lot of different muscles than man other games, so it can take you a little longer to build that improv muscle up. Feel free to flip it back on to the players with a question. "We'll, sure, you've swung off the chandelier and kicked the baron in the face, but something's gone wrong - terribly wrong! What were you hoping didn't happen?" Thanks for this, it's very helpful. Asking the group questions for world building is a pretty interesting idea and I am definitely going to try it. You're right though, this game does flex some very different muscles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
ElegantFugue posted:Lantern from Inverse World, with the Light reflavored to a combination of The Spirits and an element of their choosing? Hm, I hadn't really looked too closely at the Lantern in the past because I was a bit more intrigued by the other IW playbooks, but glancing at it now this looks like it could be a decent way to go about doing what he wants to do with a little tweaking. Still open to other suggestions though, if anyone has any other ideas they think would work for a Bender-esque character.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
Write your own and post it to this thread so we can provide feedback.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
I've just started running a Dungeon World game, and ran into a minor snag early on: The druid, in melee with a saw-armed robotic assassin, wanted to avoid an attack by shapeshifting into a squirrel. I'd call it a Defy Danger and be done with it, but the Shapshifter move has it's own set of 10+, 7-9, and 6- results, focused entirely on how much you can do once you're in animal form. The problem: It feels like overkill to need two rolls, but I'm not really sure how to go about merging them. Does anybody have a good precedent for this sort of thing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
Handgun Phonics posted:I've just started running a Dungeon World game, and ran into a minor snag early on: The druid, in melee with a saw-armed robotic assassin, wanted to avoid an attack by shapeshifting into a squirrel. I'd call it a Defy Danger and be done with it, but the Shapshifter move has it's own set of 10+, 7-9, and 6- results, focused entirely on how much you can do once you're in animal form. Two rolls is reasonable if its a very challenging task. If a player is attempting something dangerous, breaking it up into a series of rolls is how you express how dangerous or difficult a thing is. That said, you could still tag bad things or compromises onto a shapeshift roll. 6-, you change, but your tiny form gets swatted. On a 7-9, you can chose between keeping yourself safe, or keeping an ally safe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
As a DW GM I call for multiple rolls all the time, and would certainly do so for a druid trying to avoid danger through a size change. There are plenty of other situations that work best with two rolls too, like the classic "Defy Danger before making a Hack and Slash" to attack an enemy with some kind of dangerous defense. I've asked for Defy Dangers on multiple stats for some player plans, or a Defy Danger and class move when they're trying to do the class move under pressure (which might apply to your druid example). It's an important part of the DM's toolkit - the more rolls your players trigger the more risky what they're doing becomes. However, there are other ways to handle this. You could call for Defy Danger Wis alone, in which case the druid wouldn't get any animal moves and pop back into human form once the enemy attack is finished. But go for multiple rolls if the player wants to do anything in animal form. DD alone works because it's established that changing shape is something the druid can do, fictionally speaking. You could write a combined move and call for a single roll, I really don't see the harm in just merging each tier of results for Defy Danger and Shapeshifter into a combined move. "When you avoid danger by changing your form, roll + Wis." TheDemon fucked around with this message at 00:15 on Jul 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2013 23:26
|
|
|
Hmm. Alright, that sounds good. Solves my issues with the Initiate almost exclusively using Sublime Understand of the Body, to boot. I guess I just need to get more used to combining and adjusting moves on the fly. Handgun Phonics fucked around with this message at 01:06 on Jul 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 00:06
|
|
|
This system has ruined me on Initiative. I can't stand it in any system now and not getting to do off the wall terrible poo poo that makes sense from a fiction perspective as a GM whenever it feels right (with the players fully cool on it due to their own failed rolls) feels really, really constrained now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
I still like initiative in tactical games; limiting your actions to a certain window makes for an interesting challenge. In looser games, in the majority of RPGs? Yeah, I hate it too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
Initiative is OK when turns are fast and the group is relatively small. If players have to wait longer than 5 minutes before they get a turn, I get impatient for my turn, and then feel like I have to keep my action basic, and focused on being effective for the group instead of doing something fun or exciting. "Waiting" players should get to do something when it's not their turn, assist, or communicate, something that modifies (But not nullifies) the active player's actions. I think that's true of just about any tabletop game or board game though. DW does this with how it treats the game as a discussion, and backs it up with moves like aid/interfere, and spending hold to take a single action or gain a single effect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 07:29
|
|
|
Is there some reason DW still has the 3-18 ability scores? Is it pure nostalgia? Are there common sources that change stats? Can I just replace all ability scores with the modifier instead without breaking anything mechanically? The only direct ability reference I can think of off the top of my head is for HP (Con directly + X)
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 07:39
|
|
|
There is no reason to keep them. If there was something I'd fix about DW it would be to figure out good Hx for the playbooks to use instead of bonds. And the second thing would be, if I didnt want to tap into D&D nostalgia, would be to get rid of the ability scores and use health levels instead of HP.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 07:44
|
|
|
Handgun Phonics posted:I've just started running a Dungeon World game, and ran into a minor snag early on: The druid, in melee with a saw-armed robotic assassin, wanted to avoid an attack by shapeshifting into a squirrel. I'd call it a Defy Danger and be done with it, but the Shapshifter move has it's own set of 10+, 7-9, and 6- results, focused entirely on how much you can do once you're in animal form. If squirrels have a move that lets them avoid robosaw attacks, then the druid just spends hold and the move works. If the squirrel has no such move, then the druid has to Defy Danger. How do you know if the squirrel has such a move? That's up to you guys. I'm fond of having the druid describe one useful animal move when he transforms; presumably he's changing into that particular animal for a reason and that reason will show up in his choice of move. Then the GM thinks of a second move that is useful. Then the GM and/or player thinks of a third move that isn't obviously useful, but is flavorful or just funny. Jot down those three moves on an index card and add it to the druid's repetoire. Also, don't feel confined that every shapeshifting needs to use the Shapeshifter move. Shapeshifter is for when you first transform, then do a thing. If the act of transformation is the important thing; transforming to dodge an attack, transforming to smack a dude with claws, or some similar immediate singular action, then who cares about hold? Just make it a Defy Danger or Hack&Slash move and describe it as a momentary transformation. If the druid wants to keep doing more stuff in that shape afterwards, they can still roll a Shapeshifter move, sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 11:56
|
|
|
victrix posted:Is there some reason DW still has the 3-18 ability scores? Is it pure nostalgia? Are there common sources that change stats? It is mostly for nostalgia, but Constitution and Charisma are in use (for HP and bargaining, respectively). There's two reasons to keep them in: 1) because they're a pretty good untapped design space for new classes - having a Corruption limit equal to your Wisdom and having moves that give you Corruption, for example, or maybe adding the GUMSHOE-esque ability to spend Investigation points (maximum equal to your Intelligence) to automatically discover clues, etc. 2) they are pretty intricately part of HP. I tried to come up with a way to do HP without Constitution and it's a lot of effort for something very inelegant. Keeping the scores ends up being much simpler.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 13:02
|
|
|
Last time I looked, I thought you increased your stats by one each level, rather than your modifier, so you'd have to do something about that, too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 14:09
|
|
|
The creators are doing an AMA on reddit today, probably wrapping up soon, but there are some interesting topics covered here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
The Rules Cyclopedia was released on RPGNow today, which reminded me how much I loved the weapon mastery rules, which made me write this: When you defeat a worthy foe with your signature hammer, you may take this move the next time you level up: Crack the Shell When you hit a target with a hammer, you can choose to reduce its armor by 1d4 instead of doing your damage. When you have "Crack the Shell", you can take any of the following moves when you level up: Bring the Hammer Down When you use Crack the Shell, you deal 1d6 damage in addition to reducing the target's armor. Everything Looks Like A Nail When you Bend Bars/Lift Gates using your hammer, you can choose to automatically succeed, but the item is always destroyed beyond repair and it always make a lot of noise. Ring His Bell When you successfully hack & slash with your hammer, you can knock the target for a loop in addition to doing your damage, making him unable to act for a few minutes until his head stops ringing. Earthshaker When you slam your hammer into the ground, roll +STR. On a 10+, you create a small quake that knocks everyone nearby off their feet. On a 7-9, people are shaken, but still up. Either way, the shockwave still knocks things off shelves, shatters fragile objects, and such. Groundbreaker Requires Earthshaker, level 6-10 When you use Earthshaker, spikes erupt from the ground doing 1d6 damage to everyone in the move's range except yourself. This move tends to be rough on the local environment; walls will crack and ceilings will collapse. 12
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 22:39
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:Ring His Bell These are all awesome, and I totally get that the fiction has to fit, but this is a bit difficult to parse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 01:25
|
|
|
robotsinmyhead posted:These are all awesome, and I totally get that the fiction has to fit, but this is a bit difficult to parse. The idea was that you hit someone so hard they "miss their next action", but I couldn't think of how to put that in DW terms.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:The idea was that you hit someone so hard they "miss their next action", but I couldn't think of how to put that in DW terms. I guess I just meant that "a few minutes" seemed overboard. I can understand your problem though, I'm not sure how I'd word it either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
"Until he has time to clear his head," with or without optional "for a few moments" seems to imply time, without being "a few seconds." Vague measurements always seem a little easier to use.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
axelsoar posted:Yeah, this was my general thought process. It really limits the kind of adventures and stories the vampire can take place in if they just get destroyed by sunlight -1 ongoing is pretty rough in this system actually. Though I agree that I could make it a little more varied in terms of what the weakness is. I hope I'm not treading on your toes but I wanted to try my own take on the vampire class! The moves are pretty rough at the moment but here's what I got so far: quote:The Vampire The rolls and balance need work but that's roughly how I'd imagine the class to work. How does that look? (preliminary: yes, RAW your weakness can be an immediately lethal urge to count objects and yes, I think that's awesome)
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
I think I have a problem with making my mooks too sympathetic. I'm not quite sure how to make something good and evil that's going to die horribly when they kill it, when that thing is another person with a weapon. Also, how am I supposed to consider a dropkick from a non-Initiate. Is that still just unarmed damage? Handgun Phonics fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 04:20
|
|
|
Handgun Phonics posted:I think I have a problem with making my mooks too sympathetic. I'm not quite sure how to make something good and evil that's going to die horribly when they kill it, when that thing is another person with a weapon. As for the dropkick question: when someone deals damage, they deal their class damage. However they deal that damage. The trick here is that classes like the Initiate and fist-using Fighters have more leeway with getting to deal that damage unarmed. More dramatic license. In a lot of situations, an unarmed character'd have to Defy Danger where someone with a weapon wouldn't, unless they're already in a good position to punch or kick or headbutt or whatever someone. And, truthfully, medieval combat training did often include some unarmed moves, made with your offhand or the like whenever a good opportunity popped up. Kaja Rainbow fucked around with this message at 07:49 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 07:47
|
|
|
Handgun Phonics posted:Also, how am I supposed to consider a dropkick from a non-Initiate. Is that still just unarmed damage? As with all attacks of any kind originating from your character in DW, would it deal damage to the target given what the target is? If so, deal your class damage. If not, no. The simplest example here being that your sword isn't gonna do poo poo to a dragon's hide, but a rocket-propelled ballista might.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 09:16
|
|
|
robotsinmyhead posted:These are all awesome, and I totally get that the fiction has to fit, but this is a bit difficult to parse. How about Ring His Bell When you roll a 12+ on hack & slash with your hammer, you strike so hard your opponent is stunned for a moment. Continue your next action without the GM making a move in response.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 09:23
|
|
|
sentrygun posted:As with all attacks of any kind originating from your character in DW, would it deal damage to the target given what the target is? If so, deal your class damage. If not, no. The simplest example here being that your sword isn't gonna do poo poo to a dragon's hide, but a rocket-propelled ballista might. For an example, I threw a carnivorous and mobile wall at my players. To do damage at all they had to stab it in its soft mouth, which wasn't always open for convenient stabbing. In the end, it ended up turtling up against the wall after running away, and the party proceeded onward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 09:39
|
|
|
I've bundled up the Fool and the Giant into a twin pack with a discount, so if you've been sitting on the fence about throwing money at them, you can now spend your lunch money on the Fools and Giants Playbook Pair. As always, the free google docs text versions are available in the OP, and Right Here. I haven't been making any dungeon world material lately. I'm letting Lands of the Dead percolate, and currently working on Weird World, a sort of mash up of Powered By The Apocalypse and PDQ and FATE. Characters' major stats are defined by single word or small phrase Qalities. Here's the current version of the Player's Handbook. The basic system is pretty much setting agnostic, leaving setting creation up to the group, or in game-starter Playsets. madadric fucked around with this message at 06:53 on Jul 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 09:42
|
|
|
UrbanLabyrinth posted:How about Ring His Bell Too gamey by far - you should never refer to a move as a discrete unit in move text. Here's how to make it not be wonky: Ring His Bell When you Hack and Slash with your hammer, on a 10+, you can stun the target for a few moments in addition to doing your damage. "Stun" is already a defined keyword in the rules, so there's no need to reinvent the wheel.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 10:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:Too gamey by far - you should never refer to a move as a discrete unit in move text. Ring My Bell When you swing your mighty hammer at your foe, on a 10+, Things get ...awkward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 12:44
|
|