|
Handgun Phonics posted:The Mage version with the foci list is the most complex playbook I've seen to date- I've much preferred the second version, which is much closer to The Witch anyway. As a rule, I distrust any playbook with a required third page. It's still not really that bad though. One of the players in my game might be a bit late, so we made his character early and we'll just do Bonds when he shows up. He had absolutely no knowledge of the game, I literally just sent him the .pdf from the OP, he didn't feel like writing on the .pdf so he was just telling me what to write and I'd pen it in, and we were doing the whole thing via texting. I feel confident in saying this was about as annoying and constraining a way to do it as possible short of me holding the pen in my teeth. Still took less than 5 minutes and he's super stoked. By the way, the character generation is amazing and I can't stop gushing about how much I love this game. Expect a lengthy, squeeling post Tuesday once I finally get to play it.
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
Has anyone played with the Sky Chain dungeon starter? I'm thinking about using it, and wondering what sorts of adventures other people have had.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:To be honest, I did way better with The Witch for a generic spellcaster than I did with the Mage, if you want a non-Vancian generic replacement spellcaster. Whoops! That's what I get for posting at 3:30 AM. Here's the Bright Sorcerer
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 03:17
|
|
They both link to the Sorcerer Grim.
|
PerniciousKnid posted:I've had the opposite opinion, as a DW newbie; most alternative playbooks are too complex for my liking. I couldn't even get through the Mage playbook foci without my eyes glazing over. Handgun Phonics posted:The Mage version with the foci list is the most complex playbook I've seen to date- I've much preferred the second version, which is much closer to The Witch anyway. As a rule, I distrust any playbook with a required third page. I just had this exact experience tonight. This was my first game of Dungeon World, and it didn't go very well at all. First time for everyone playing Dungeon World, and for at least one player, first time playing roleplaying games period. We're going to focus on this guy, because he was the guy who chose the Mage playbook. (He also was an unexpected addition to the game, since he had come over at the suggestion of another friend for band practice, and ended up sticking around for the game). He seemed a bit confused during the whole game about how things were done, and the fact that I wasn't asking enough questions didn't help either. There was also a ton of people talking over each other, making things get a bit hectic. It didn't help the new guy any that his rolls were pretty bad. I was using the Lair of the Unknown adventure to help me ease into DW. In the first room, there's a mosaic that comes to life and yells at the players. For some reason, the Mage wanted to trigger the mosaic and turn it into an old, naked person (The specific reason for the old naked fellow was that he took the Abyss focus, and all his spells had to be horrifying. He figured old naked dudes did the trick). He ended up failing, and I had the spell turn the mosaic into a Gibbering Mouther, a monster I knew would strike some fear into at least two of my players, who had a bad encounter with one in a previous game. So the Mouther ends up running over the Mage trying to chase down the other three characters, who had presided to bolt straight out of the dungeon at the sight of it. As the battle raged on outside. the Mage attempted to figure out a weakness that the creature had. He botched the Spout Lore check, and I didn't actually have an idea of what to do, so I winged it and gave him a wrong answer (I said it was vulnerable to freezing). So he ends up botching his attempt at freezing the thing, and I ruled that he ended up encasing himself in ice. I ended up giving him a kinda lovely choice: Either spend some time carefully removing himself from the ice, or burst right out of there and take some damage. Unsurprisingly, he took the slower, non damage-dealing option. He then tried to use his magic to repair the Fighter's armor, which had been badly damaged during the fight. He rolled a 9, and made it incredibly spiky, with the scale on the armor having been turned into knives, so I ended up ruling that the knives were also on the inside of the armor, making it a bit hard to wear without taking damage. (I should note at this point that the player of the Mage wasn't actually choosing which options he gets on a 7-9; he was handing this responsibility off to my brother, who was much more experienced with RPG's in general). On the bright side, he ended up using his magic powers like a sonar (he's blind, you see) to find a hidden doorway in the walls. We ended it there for now. So there it is. I'm feeling it, but I feel like I'm pretty poo poo at explaining the rules. It didn't help that I wasn't completely getting along with the new guy (I found him a bit annoying, to be honest. Don't know if I should invite him back). I've got to hand a bit more agency over to the players, I think. How do you feel about this, thread? What should I be doing better to really get my game moving?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
I don't like the gold system so I've written up something more abstract - I pretty much stole the Resources system from World of Darkness. Here's the scale:
So in practice, a stubborn old horse would cost 1 Resources, a regular horse would cost 2, a really exceptional horse or an arbitrary number of horses would cost 3, an arbitrary number of exceptional horses would cost 4, and at Resources 5 I could get an arbitrary number of exceptional horses without suffering any financial strain. Edit: Improved the Resources scale. More thoughts: A castle is really just an arbitrarily sized (+1) exceptional (+1) cottage (3). A ship is an arbitrarily sized (+1) exceptional (+1) boat (2). Bigup DJ fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Jan 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
NuclearPotato posted:the fact that I wasn't asking enough questions didn't help either With new players, you need to be asking questions almost constantly, especially when you're not sure what the players are trying to do. You said: NuclearPotato posted:For some reason, the Mage wanted to trigger the mosaic and turn it into an old, naked person (The specific reason for the old naked fellow was that he took the Abyss focus, and all his spells had to be horrifying. He figured old naked dudes did the trick). Without knowing what the player wanted to do and why they wanted to do it, you'll have a very hard time using GM moves in a way that makes sense. You should be establishing a back and forth with your players, and when you don't know what your players are doing, you need to call a time out and focus in and really dig for the player motivations, especially when they are as weird as this one sounds. Ask questions until you understand exactly what is going on, what they intend to do, and why they want to do it. This is worth spending time on and will improve your sessions. As for the player constantly failing, that can lead to some of the most fun moments in a DW game, but you need to set the stakes in the right place. It sounds like many of your hard choices for the player involved damage on one side. That's fine and well, especially if it leads directly out of the fiction, but if you overuse that spice, it can seem a little punishing, especially when it feels like a non-option, like when a player with low health can take damage or take time. They end up taking time and they end up not driving toward any fiction other than, I twiddle my thumbs. One thing I always tell my players is that I will never lie to them if they do a Spout Lore check. I'd rather give them nothing than start the meta-game express, which will begin the next time your players roll 6- on a Spout Lore and immediately disregard the information you give them. Instead, I usually use the opportunity to use the GM move Reveal an unwelcome truth. I might say something like, 'Gibbering Mouthers grow when they eat', and then start having the thing immediately eat a bird or a rat and start growing. As for the Mage's attempt at repairing the armor, remember that a result of 7-9 is fundamentally a success. You want to give the player that success, but add complication, or something that may make their lives harder later. You didn't specify the conditions under which the fighter would take damage with the spiky armor, and your treatment of that ruling will help set the tone of your game: are you going to punish attempting cool stuff, or encourage cool stuff and drive the game forward? I guess I'm not seeing the upside here, unless you intend to give the player the full benefits of spiky armor and hit him with the consequences only occasionally. I might give the fighter a new move to go with the armor, but it might be tricky to get that right. If you're having trouble explaining the rules, just default to this: "10+ is a success, 7-9 is a partial success, 6- is a miss. Try anything you like, if your character is capable of it. We'll go from there. If you have a question, please ask." I usually go through some examples with new players, using moves from their playbooks to help them contextualize the way fiction drives the game. Think about the fiction of the game and make sure everything comes out of that. You're having a conversation with the players about what is happening. You talk, they talk, you talk, they talk. If they are talking to each other, let them go. If they ask you a question, answer it. If you ask them questions, focus on the person who you are talking to. Don't give in to side talk. Always end your sentences with "What do you do?". As a final piece of advice, when you're running the game, keep the GM Agenda, Principles, and Moves close at hand. Before you make a ruling, take a second and review them. Make sure you are pushing the game forward by giving the players an exciting world. If you set the tone, your players will meet you halfway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
Bigup DJ posted:I don't like the gold system so I've written up something more abstract - I pretty much stole the Resources system from World of Darkness. Here's the scale: I like things like this! Ammo for money, that type of thing. The biggest issue is that the scale really needs to be logarithmic, and could get a little weird if they have a windfall and land a big bounty, but don't have steady income. In theory, though, the system is a lot like the base purpose of The Noble, or vaguely like IW's Patron hireling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
Shamblercow posted:One thing I always tell my players is that I will never lie to them if they do a Spout Lore check. I'd rather give them nothing than start the meta-game express, which will begin the next time your players roll 6- on a Spout Lore and immediately disregard the information you give them. Instead, I usually use the opportunity to use the GM move Reveal an unwelcome truth. Holy poo poo this is the best drat advice. My players love Spouting Lore and Discerning Realities and I keep on struggling to get them 6- results that won't send them on a wild goose chase. I'm totally going to start doing this now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 09:02
|
|
|
Whybird posted:Holy poo poo this is the best drat advice. My players love Spouting Lore and Discerning Realities and I keep on struggling to get them 6- results that won't send them on a wild goose chase. I'm totally going to start doing this now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
Handgun Phonics posted:I like things like this! Ammo for money, that type of thing. The biggest issue is that the scale really needs to be logarithmic, and could get a little weird if they have a windfall and land a big bounty, but don't have steady income. In theory, though, the system is a lot like the base purpose of The Noble, or vaguely like IW's Patron hireling. These are good points, but upon thinking about it an irregular income makes perfect sense for a bunch of adventurers. They get a lot of money, they blow it on stuff and they're forced back into the dungeons to maintain their opulent lifestyles. Whybird posted:Holy poo poo this is the best drat advice. My players love Spouting Lore and Discerning Realities and I keep on struggling to get them 6- results that won't send them on a wild goose chase. I'm totally going to start doing this now. I know! It's absolutely great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 12:48
|
|
|
Reveal an Unwelcome Truth is also my go-to move for failed Spout Lore and Discern Realities rolls, but sometimes I mix it up by asking my players questions to make the move more hard-hitting. "I've got good news and bad news. Tell me the bad news and I'll give you the good news." At best, Reveal an Unwelcome Truth snowballs really well into other GM moves. If one of the PCs is trying to Spout Lore about the requirements for closing a demonic gate, a 6- result could yield an answer of "The closing of a demonic gate requires the sacrifice of one of a pure heart. Which one of you is of the purest heart?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 13:20
|
|
|
Another thing I like to do on Spout Lore/Discern Realities fails is to give them the truth, unedited, then end with "now you tell me what your character really thinks."
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 15:01
|
|
|
I've released The Sorcerer for sale! The cover art is a lovely Creative Commons piece by artist Shari Chankhamma http://sharii.com/
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:To be honest, I did way better with The Witch for a generic spellcaster than I did with the Mage, if you want a non-Vancian generic replacement spellcaster. I like that it's essentially using the Ritual framework to get the "generalist" effects of Cast a Spell. I'll have to see how it plays but I'm definitely kicking myself over not offering it as an option.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
So, basically, I think I'm done with "prep" for this game. It consists of a couple of purposely leading questions to make them give me something to riff off of : "What are you lying in ambush for?" (Follow up questions to get details.) Switch to a different player : "Where are you?" (This is left vague and will be rephrased with a small bit of leading information based off of what they're waiting for, e.g. "What is the swamp like where you're waiting?" if they're after, say, lizardmen. Follow up questions as needed.) Switch again : "Why are you here?" (As above, so it could end up being rephrased as, "Who sent you after the Lizardfolk war-party and why?") And from there I was just going to wing it. Depending on how many people show up, extra questions so that everyone is contributing equally to establishing the set-up, e.g. "What is an obstacle you faced on the way here" or whatever. Does this sound reasonable or am I being too constraining? I'm trying to think of something kind of like Dread character creation, where I'm giving them one little itty bitty detail to start things off, but I don't want to actually constrain them. Plus I liked the ambush thing because then they start off with a fight so they feel like big drat heroes, and the follow up questions and it being an ambush let them set it up exactly how they want it. I know I keep asking a lot of questions, I just really like this game and want my players to have lots of fun. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
If your players are willing to make stuff up that sounds like a great start. My group does a lot of one-shots so I'm a big fan of starting in media res so we don't have to go through the rigmarole of getting the party together and doing intro meet n greet stuff all the time. My last session was Inverse World and I started the party off on a maintenance platform underneath a giant chain between two island cities in the fog. I told them the plan was to get on board an airship, the Praestantia. Then I asked the Captain if this was his plan or if someone had put him up to it. He said that the city authorities had Shanghai'd him into making sure that the Praestantia never docked on the island. His ship was an opulent merchant ship and he didn't want to risk it in open combat against a ship of unknown capabilities just because somebody ordered him to. Hence the "jump onto it from above as it passes over" plan. I asked the party how they got through the border fort and onto the chain in the first place. Turns out the Captain and his crew are actually relatively well respected in the city and the guards happily just let them through. When I asked them who they most didn't want to catch them doing this, they mentioned a rival ship of theirs. When I asked them how they expected to be able to time the jump, one of them had a mechanical watch. I'm slowly deciding that I like to skip all the less interesting planning and prelude parts of Dungeon World capers, start at the most entertaining bit and just ask how they managed to do the preamble. You get really weird answers sometimes that make things more interesting. Also, best failed Spout Lore of the session led to me saying "Unfortunately Sky Barnacles aren't that fond of rum."
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
Bigup DJ posted:These are good points, but upon thinking about it an irregular income makes perfect sense for a bunch of adventurers. They get a lot of money, they blow it on stuff and they're forced back into the dungeons to maintain their opulent lifestyles. That's what I mean, though- the resource system works better if they do have fixed income, and can get really weird if they don't. Well, as long as you keep an eye on what level of resource you give them it probably works out. Maybe start dropping it if they go long enough without adventuring- "All: You've noticed after another night on the town that your pockets are feeling a bit light. What are you going to do about it?" or somesuch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Glazius posted:I like that it's essentially using the Ritual framework to get the "generalist" effects of Cast a Spell. I'll have to see how it plays but I'm definitely kicking myself over not offering it as an option. This reminded me of another Mage related question: how do you guys deal with responses like: "I use magic to make myself invincible!" This popped up a couple of times in last night's session, and I was a bit stumped on how to handle it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
The key to understanding the Mage, I think, is to note that nowhere in the Mage's playbook does it say "You can use magic to do anything". The phrasing of the Cast A Spell move is "When you weave a spell to help solve a problem" -- so for any given problem, a Mage always has a spell that will help them solve it. That is not the same as the Mage having every spell they can conceive of. So: Ask them which problem they're trying to solve by being invincible; the spell will help them do that, but it won't last beyond that. Also, ask for more details on the spell. How does it turn them invincible? What powers does it call upon to do it? Does it make them invincible by turning their skin as hard as steel, or deflecting blows away from them, or keeping their body in a timeless stasis, or trapping their soul inside a Horcrux? All of these details give you fodder to Reveal An Unwelcome Truth about the spell's drawbacks the next time somebody rolls a 6-.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
If/when I were to adapt a new resources system for Dungeon World, I'd definitely start with a Wealth stress track from Fate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Plague of Hats posted:If/when I were to adapt a new resources system for Dungeon World, I'd definitely start with a Wealth stress track from Fate. Where can I find this? Edit: Actually I just looked it up. Thanks for mentioning it though! Bigup DJ fucked around with this message at 02:50 on Jan 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
What are some good guidelines and resources for creating dungeons? I'm running a reflavored setting for some of my friends, and I'm planning on starting them off in a dungeon crawl. My question is- what's a good way to strike a balance between the sense of exploration, and the collaborative storytelling of dungeon world? Should I work on the layout with Flowchart Megadungeons, and leave the how/who/what up to the players? I'm thinking of starting the players off with a hard choice- in two separate parts of the world, there are these two separate events happening. One, is a big friggin' creature roaming around the skies of the mountains, while at a completely separate place there's a flying temple/mosque that just... appeared out of nowhere. Where the players (as a group) decide which one they would rather deal with, and the other one can be resolved offscreen or possibly get upgraded to a campaign front. After that, I'd ask some pretty general questions about their mission, but after that I'm back to my original problem of creating a dungeon. Sorry if this post seems a little spacey. Still trying to get everything figured out in my head.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
I ran a reasonably successful dungeon-focused DW campaign where I went in with a general idea of the dungeon theme and a few things that would be in it, but asspulled much of the details. You can easily just have a couple or so major setpieces and/or enemies in mind and go from there. Honestly, my players didn't have that much direct input into the dungeons other than picking which ones they wanted to do (you can definitely do it with more player input than that), but their actions considerably changed the flow of what happened in said dungeons (in one dungeon they completely avoided all potential fights). The most important thing is responsiveness to your players and that can take many forms. (It's worth noting that the players did get a lot of input into setting details in general, including completely dictating what their races are like culturally.) That said, some people do considerably more planning than I did, and it works well for them, too. Overall it depends on what amount and kind of planning feels comfortable to you. The most important thing is flexibility--that can take the form of asking your players questions or deciding things based on their actions. Make allowances for surprising solutions. Kaja Rainbow fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Jan 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Whybird posted:The key to understanding the Mage, I think, is to note that nowhere in the Mage's playbook does it say "You can use magic to do anything". The phrasing of the Cast A Spell move is "When you weave a spell to help solve a problem" -- so for any given problem, a Mage always has a spell that will help them solve it. That is not the same as the Mage having every spell they can conceive of. This is a very good point! The adage goes "When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." When your focus is say, the Dragon, you can solve just about anything with enough fire - but you can bet there's going to be problems because of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Alumnus Post posted:This is a very good point! The adage goes "When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." When your focus is say, the Dragon, you can solve just about anything with enough fire - but you can bet there's going to be problems because of it. I find the mage playbook to be adaptable and encourage RP and strong descriptive narrative. The "weave a spell" does give a lot of latitude, but one does "weave a spell to help solve a problem, not to provide a pat and immediate solution. To take an example from the game saberwulf is running next door, it's the difference between using (a) The Dragon to give yourself 45 seconds worth of small, glide-worthy flaming spectral dragon wings and (b) saying, "gee wouldn't it be great to teleport at will? Some Dragons can teleport, so I'll teleport myself and any objects I aim my wand at." (a)is a characterful, limited use of "weave a spell" that sets relatively little precedent for further use, while (b) really changes the overall narrative. I'd like to think most players would gravitate towards things like (a) naturally because (a) is much more fun! It also helps that the narrative control of the DM should make some situations much less friendly to the "weave a spell" move. For example, when the player proposes that they "weave a spell" to help solve the problem of a deep, unbridgeable gorge, the narrative control excercized by the DM can have their bridge be dangerously narrow, only extend 3/4 of the way across the chasm, have a countdown until you can no longer sustain it, etc. Finally, helps that the XP system should be discouraging players from "weaving a spell" all the time, since they need to fail to advance, and "weave a spell" rolls are typically rolling at a +2 or +3 for most mages. If you were to edit the playbook to tone it down, I would give worse fail consequences to the 7-9 rolls or build in stronger restrictions than the -1 for weaving a spell outside your domain. I might also build on the idea that "weaving" takes time, and mages can't do it very well in the middle of battle/stress/flaming catapults/bat swarms.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
The big issue I have with Mage is it seems inherently antagonistic. If there is a problem, the Mage can use creativity to solve it. Whenever you pick up the dice, it is to address a problem, so the Mage's weave a spell trigger is overly broad. Phrased another way, "Whenever you <alter reality> to <address the matter at hand>" is just an incredibly broad trigger that will never NOT trigger. So the GM, when confronted with a situation other than table full of Mages, is left with the guy who can do anything and the guys who cannot. All of the proposed solutions to the overly broad trigger are either 1) The player has to not abuse it or 2) The GM has to completely subvert the Dungeon World fail-forward methodology and settle into an antagonist role where, because the move CAN trigger on anything and addresses all matters, a 10+/7-9 is not REALLY a success, it just does a thing that may or may not be useful. Again, if EVERYONE in the group has the Move "I can do anything to address any problem", or "I can <alter reality> to <help solve a problem>" then its not an issue. But Dungeon World moves are not structured that way in general, and the Mage sticks out like a sore thumb because of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Laphroaig posted:The big issue I have with Mage is it seems inherently antagonistic. If there is a problem, the Mage can use creativity to solve it. Whenever you pick up the dice, it is to address a problem, so the Mage's weave a spell trigger is overly broad. This kind of concern is pretty much why the GM in the last DW game I joined restricted our Mage to solely spells of their Focus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
Kaja Rainbow posted:This kind of concern is pretty much why the GM in the last DW game I joined restricted our Mage to solely spells of their Focus. While I generally like the Mage, I can easily imagine extra creative / self centered / antagonistic players finding a variety of ways to tie far-out things to the loose tags associated with their Focus. There's also no way to constrain moves to "reasonable" uses of the power in question. For example, if we were constantly confronting a dynamic where the Mage says things like, "to help solve the problem of these goblins shooting arrows at me, I use my Focus on the Fog to transmute myself into mist and float across the room," and the DM says, "well, drat," it damages the usual mutual-forward-narrative aspect of the game. Now, I'm clearly being a devil's advocate here - generally the Mage is good, but it's a class which can't exist in 'pick up games' of Dungeon World or be played by inexperienced players still in a D&D type mindset. BrotherAdso fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Jan 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
This is why gnome's new specific Mage playbooks are going to be awesome
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
BrotherAdso posted:While I generally like the Mage, I can easily imagine extra creative / self centered / antagonistic players finding a variety of ways to tie far-out things to the loose tags associated with their Focus. Two out of three of those I wouldn't consider worth playing with in the first place. And for someone who's just being overly creative, there's always talking to them about it. That's not to say that gnome's new Mage playbooks aren't awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Boing posted:This is why gnome's new specific Mage playbooks are going to be awesome Yeah, I am all for the new mages. It makes each type of mage feel different, and makes "a magic character" powerful and versatile without doing literally everything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
I put it to you that the mage is actually too weak. You weave a spell to help solve a problem, and the result is that, hooray, you've helped! Everyone pats you on the back reassuringly because make no mistake, friend, you're definitely helping with this problem, in some way. Then they go solve the problem. If you have an overly permissive DM it'd let you do just about anything, but an overly permissive DM would let anyone do just about anything. Played straight, "weave a spell to help solve a problem" turns you into set dressing and background flavor. It's like being the player whose character knows lots of languages - okay, great, thanks to you we can talk to the insect-men or whatever! Anyway, as I was saying, the actual content of the game is as follows:
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Anyone who bought Jacob Randolph's alternative playbooks may want to check drivethrurpg. He has added in a verison where the playbooks are separated into their own pdfs.Laphroaig posted:2) The GM has to completely subvert the Dungeon World fail-forward methodology and settle into an antagonist role where, because the move CAN trigger on anything and addresses all matters, a 10+/7-9 is not REALLY a success, it just does a thing that may or may not be useful. I had a GM do this the last time I played the Mage. It wasn't a fun experience. DW does run on the premise of failure driving forward the story, but having every attempt to use magic blow up in your face regardless of how you roll is a bit disheartening. When your main shtick only ever makes things worse, even if you roll high, then why use it? I'm sure a good GM could find a happy middle ground, but I'm just talking about my prior experience with this solution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
I was playing with the mage last night, and I feel like it tends to be too easy to go, "I cast a spell to fix this problem," roll, and generally the problem is solved. As long as it isn't in my opposed column, I feel like a plot device that takes all the difficulty out of most encounters. Is that because of the GM? I don't know, but it's easy to think of ways to use magic to fix problems. (Like summoning plant people, or creating trenches with my mind. Or Enchanting rocks to explode when I throw them.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Even if the Mage is capable of fixing any problem, couldn't you rule that if the origin of the problem is something opposed to their focus then they cannot affect it with weave a spell? I just thought of that, but I've never really had a problem with my Clock Mage player being all powerful. Often, he can be found bungling a spell or the drawback he picks allows for hillarious or surprising events to unfold, more often than not, he would solve one problem only to create a new one. The first spell he ever cast was to make any weapons within 3 feet of him stop dead; he blew the roll, so naturally I make the spell effect his weapons too! After accidentally freezing his staff, he tired again to fix the problem and ended up turning his Staff into an unpredictable immovable rod, something which I can use any time he rolls a 6-. My players were crossing a giant saltwater marsh and a storm was blowing in from the sea. I was going to try and separate them, but then my Clock Mage rolls back time on the weather. Super cool, So I let him do it, buying them 2 hours. A fight later, they find a wrecked boat burried in the muck, not only did they dig it out, but he rewound time on it to restore it. He picks his drawback, and I decide that the boat is only big enough for half the party; so I got to split them after all. He's also tried to freeze a black ooze only to succeed in cutting it in half; he's caused a heart attack while trying to speed up the ranger's regeneration; he casued a stilt-house to age rapidly and as half the party fell through the rotten holes forming in the floor, the black ooze, which he outran with a haste spell, catches up to the party. (the ranger was pissed about that one) While fighting the ooze in the same house, he ended up collapsing the entire building. and Lastly, he tried to reverse an old woman's age, only to put a death curse on her (and 2 other party members who were helping!) that would take her life in 3 days, unless they activated the sun dias in a sunken temple that a cult of evil elves were looking for in the marsh. All in all, his spells were powerful, but it is from the drawbacks that I was able to create many more story elements. Let you mages be super Gandalf strong, but make the concequences of their endevors appropriately worthy. We nearly got to a point where the other players were saying, don't cast a spell unless someone REALLY needs it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
So I've been writing up a system for disease and insanity and I was wondering how to handle instant death effects. I mean on one hand I hate instant death effects because they're usually fair, but what am I supposed to do when someone messes up a Defy Danger roll and they're crushed by a boulder or tossed into a sphere of oblivion or something? It'd be a bit cheap if I introduced a terrible life-threatening obstacle and then ruled out the possibility that it could kill them, but I don't want anyone to die just because they got a bad roll. What can I do here? Edit: Actually, if I'm telegraphing the danger and giving them enough chances to get out of the way, is there anything wrong with having them die instantly? Bigup DJ fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Jan 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
Bigup DJ posted:So I've been writing up a system for disease and mental illness and I was wondering how to handle instant death effects. I mean on one hand I hate instant death effects because they're generally not very interesting, but what am I supposed to do when someone messes up a Defy Danger roll and they're crushed by a boulder or tossed into a sphere of oblivion or something? It would feel a bit cheap if I introduced a terrible life-threatening obstacle and then ruled out the possibility that it could kill them, but I don't want anyone to die just because they got a bad roll. What can I do here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Boing posted:This is why gnome's new specific Mage playbooks are going to be awesome Speaking of, I have finished drafts of two more mages, ready to go! Posting some previews, full versions will be up when I make art happen to them. Mask Mage is the spy from TF2 and every Trickster figure of legend rolled into a ball and given a disguise kit. Star Mage is a wizard from outer space with a portal gun. I am having fun writing these. Bigup DJ posted:Edit: Actually, if I'm telegraphing the danger and giving them enough chances to get out of the way, is there anything wrong with having them die instantly? Nope! Except you can't kill them instantly, they get a Last Breath roll first. But yeah, if you telegraphed that this is seriously dangerous and something goes seriously wrong, you can make them take their Last Breath immediately. Getting crushed by a boulder is seriously bad news. EDIT: DERP I forgot to actually put in the links gnome7 fucked around with this message at 03:29 on Jan 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:Speaking of, I have finished drafts of two more mages, ready to go! Posting some previews, full versions will be up when I make art happen to them. Are you ever going to update the content post on the first page with these?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
Handgun Phonics posted:Are you ever going to update the content post on the first page with these? Related question: Are you planning on putting all the Mages into a bundle? Also, I noticed from the previews that the Winter and Masked mages both have an advanced move called "Conceal, Don't Feel". If this was intentional, I like it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 04:23
|
|