|
Bigup DJ posted:Intelligent ones with opposable thumbs and language I mean! Like Duergar and Gnolls. But where's the fun in that? An intelligent flock of ducks or swarm of bees is much scarier than your average pack of gnolls.
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 09:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
I got chased by geese once and I agree that they are definitely more frightening than goblins.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 11:13
|
|
|
Hugoon Chavez posted:TRIGGER WARNING THIS poo poo. We had a family friend who kept geese on their acreage, and I have fond and not so fond childhood memories of being chased all over their yard by white-winged monsters taller than waist height. That poo poo is as real as it gets. TheDemon fucked around with this message at 12:24 on Mar 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 11:38
|
|
|
Wahad posted:But where's the fun in that? An intelligent flock of ducks or swarm of bees is much scarier than your average pack of gnolls. Intelligent Ducks mugging newbie adventurers has a long tradition in Old School Fantasy RPGs anyway. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 12:00
|
|
|
When surrounded and viciously pecked by a Gaggle of angry Geese, roll +DEX On a 10+ you manage to control yourself and leave the horrible creatures behind, with lots of pain. On a 7-9 you crawl away from the terrible pain inflicted by their powerful beaks. The damage is considerable, and you might be afraid of Geese from now on. On a 6- Gods help you, you get overwhelmed by the angry feather demons and pecked unconscious. You might lose an eye. Any bird bigger than your thumb now gives you flashbacks to the terrifying nightmare you lived this day. Even eating chicken fills you with dread. The Fowl Prowler When you survive a terrible attack by a group of deadly Geese, or some other big bird, you develop an obsessive hate for their kind and a desire to see the world covered in blood and feathers. The next time you level up, you maychoose this move: Two birds, one stone: When you kill a Big Bird, you might inmediately do your damage to another bird of the same type in your reach. Killing another Bird with this move counts as a trigger for this move. After that, you might choose the following moves on level up: Feather Boa: When you perform a Fowl Massacre, and take your time to pluck your victims, gain +1 feather At 5 Feathers, you gain +1 ongoing to any damage rolls against Big Birds. At 10 Feathers, you gain the capacity to sense Fowls nearby, and a +1 ongoing to "Fight or Fly" At 20 Feathers, you can fall slowly for short periods of time, using your feather boa (now feather cape). At 40 Feathers, you become Death Incarnate for Fowls. They tell stories about you, and you become a minor (minor, minor) Deity of death in the Geese pantheon. Your Fight or Fly move instantly suceeds, and becomes a passive effect that happens whenever you are in the presence of any bird. Fight or Fly: When interacting with birds, roll +CHA. On a 10+ you may force their Fight or Fly mechanism. They fight however you choose, in panic, or fly away if able. If not able to fly they run away from you as fast as possible. On a 7-9 the GM decides both effect and targets if applicable. On a 6- the Geese get mad at you and attack you relentlessly. They take +1 ongoing against you in this battle. A body tempered by pecks. Once per battle, when you receive no more than 2 damage, you might ignore it. Something's a fowl: Your obsesion against birds has made you a little unbalanced in the head. When you convince yourself than an enemy is, in fact, a bird in disguise, roll +WIS On a 10+, that enemy efectively becomes a bird for you. All of the moves that affect birds now affect it, too. On a 7-9 you are convinced of its birdness, but must prove it to anyone in the room. If you do so, use the result above. On a 6- you are not only convinced that the enemy is a secret bird spy, but that everyone except for your close allies is. Hugoon Chavez fucked around with this message at 08:54 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 12:45
|
|
|
So, I love Dungeon World. As a GM and as a player, this is my favorite system. My problem is, my "IRL" group that I've had since High School (not so long ago, I graduated 2013) is trying to get a good tabletop going again. The problem is, they were fans of Savage Worlds and don't seem to be impressed by any system I've brought up, including Dungeon World. In fact, Dungeon World seems to have fallen flat on its face. I can't get them to come up with any fiction - it feels as if they still expect me to tell them everything, and they can't get their minds around how the DW system works. Any advice on helping them to understand the system? I can't assign any extra reading because "Lol gently caress that poo poo" as one of my players said (and 2 of the 3 others agreed to this sentiment).
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Of note to anyone who wanted a print copy: https://plus.google.com/+AdamKoebel/posts/aL8JE55Qge9Nevermore214 posted:Any advice on helping them to understand the system? I can't assign any extra reading because "Lol gently caress that poo poo" as one of my players said (and 2 of the 3 others agreed to this sentiment). Make them play Fiasco first, then go back to DW and stress that the game will not work unless they all make an effort and pitch in with coming up with the fiction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Bigup DJ posted:Intelligent ones with opposable thumbs and language I mean! Like Duergar and Gnolls. Snotlings, Skaven, Skinks (see Warhammer Fantasy) Gremlins, Ghoulies, Smurfs (or their mischievous counterparts, the Naugthies) I second Living Dolls - imagine a chest or closet full of cursed, animated dolls or puppets... Pygmies or Pymgy <blanks> (e.g. Pygmy Bugbears, Pygmy Gnolls) Zombie Children Live mind-controlled Children (imagine the moral dilemma...for some groups) Lilliputians Lilliputians with steampunk Ornithopters and Battlesuits
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Hugoon Chavez posted:The final quack: This move absolutely must be called 'Two birds with one stone'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:This move absolutely must be called 'Two birds with one stone'. Sounds cooler, I'll edit it! Also added a new move, because I like beating a dead horse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 08:54
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:Make them play Fiasco first, then go back to DW and stress that the game will not work unless they all make an effort and pitch in with coming up with the fiction. Fiasco? I don't see a link in the OP about Fiasco, is there anywhere I can read up about it? Edit: But I did find a cool module/adventure. The Indigo Galleon? That's a pretty sweet adventure. I think I may end up using this instead of what I had planned, see if this works any better. Nevermore214 fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Nevermore214 posted:Fiasco? I don't see a link in the OP about Fiasco, is there anywhere I can read up about it? It's unrelated to DW, but an amazing game of collective storytelling. Totally recommended, and great fun with some friends. http://www.bullypulpitgames.com/games/fiasco/ It's a great way to get your players to help create the story along everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
Nevermore214 posted:Fiasco? I don't see a link in the OP about Fiasco, is there anywhere I can read up about it? I used Indigo Galleon as the first one-shot I ran. It was pretty awesome.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
The Deleter posted:I want to thank everyone for their feedback and encouragement on the Cook. I sat down and wrote a long list of cool moves that cooks could do, and I am pleased to report that I managed a lot of cool moves that weren't boring +1 affairs! I also watched that scene in Kung Fu Panda where Po defeats Tai Lung by using noodles and giant bamboo "chopsticks" which was super loving cool, and watched the God of Cooking, which was a delightfully insane as every Shaolin kung-fu movie I've seen. Maybe I missed it, but at least a reference to El Fuerte (at least in the names) would not go amiss.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Nevermore214 posted:Fiasco? I don't see a link in the OP about Fiasco, is there anywhere I can read up about it? As Hugoon Chavez mentioned, Fiasco is an entirely different game, but it's great in that it's a game that is designed to replicate the kind of stuff you get in Cohen brothers films, and also in that it is almost entirely about players telling a story together with no character sheet or stats or skills or anything like that - you just have protagonists and you try to make them interact in ways that make for a good story. It's a good game to use to break people in to storygaming in general, and to being in a more participatory mood (which is particularly relevant to DW).
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:Of note to anyone who wanted a print copy: https://plus.google.com/+AdamKoebel/posts/aL8JE55Qge9 IPR has it in now. https://plus.google.com/112484087750169360510/posts/hX6RkPYMsZW
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 11:15
|
|
|
Just been informed about this ruleset and it looks like exactly what I'm looking for. I introduced my friends to D&D 3.5 and while we all enjoyed it, we all got bogged down in the rules and mechanics. This looks so elegant in comparison and should make things a lot smoother, really hyped to give it a go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
I was thinking on introducing this system since it sounds super fun but I had a couple questions which are possibly dumb and missing the point of the game. 1. How do you handle fights with multiple monsters? From what I understand the game is totally reactive to the players. That seems to make sense if they are all fighting one big guy and they fail a roll and are dealt damage by it. But if you have say, four players and six monsters and they all decide to attack one, do the other five just sit around and then all attack if a player flubs a roll, or is this something that is totally up to the GM's discretion? 2. I was thinking about grabbing an old Warhammer Roleplay adventure as a rough guide to start with and then if the players ended up going off the rails to just roll with it. The rulebook says that's a bad idea but there have been some online reviews where players pretty much used old D&D modules and had fun results. Is that a bad idea for me to try?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
quote:1. How do you handle fights with multiple monsters? From what I understand the game is totally reactive to the players. That seems to make sense if they are all fighting one big guy and they fail a roll and are dealt damage by it. But if you have say, four players and six monsters and they all decide to attack one, do the other five just sit around and then all attack if a player flubs a roll, or is this something that is totally up to the GM's discretion? I don't think it's right to say the game is totally reactive to the players, just that very little happens without the players involvement. There's nothing stopping the MC from just pointing at someone at the table and being like, "Okay, while Fighter and Cleric are wailing at the minotaur, one of the orcs uses the distraction to sneak past the front line. He's got his mace over his head and in just a few seconds it's probably gonna hit you if you don't act. What do you do?" In fact that is probably what the MC should be doing to ensure that the scene doesn't become static and boring.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Yep, the game is built as 'bad guys act at the same time/on a failure'. also a PCs failure should hurt, but it doesn't have to hurt them directly. Say the fighter tries to do something to the orc with the mace but whiffs somehow. You can totally 'put him in a spot' by saying the orc blows past him to squish the wizard which is now an "oh poo poo" for two characters. Or maybe instead of an orc, it's an evil wizard, who now manages to cast the spell that stuns half the party. (Also DW is notable for being one of the few games where slightly being a dick gm is a good thing/makes the game interesting)
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
Interesting. Sorry I'm coming from a background of game where rules are incredibly inflexible and there's a rigid A->B logic so I'm trying to wrap my head around this one. It really sounds like a lot of fun. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
The rules for monsters ganging up on a player is pretty straightforward too, just roll all the damage dice for all the monsters attacking and whatever monster gets the largest number is the damage that the player takes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
If everyone is ignoring half the monsters, that is a golden opportunity for them to make hard moves, though you probably want to broadcast that ignoring half the monsters is problematic. Its not entirely reactive, it's just that there's never no reaction. You can react to a players roll and then immediately make a soft move with two different threats. It's on the players to decide how they handle both simultaneously, or if they choose to ignore one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
Radish posted:2. I was thinking about grabbing an old Warhammer Roleplay adventure as a rough guide to start with and then if the players ended up going off the rails to just roll with it. The rulebook says that's a bad idea but there have been some online reviews where players pretty much used old D&D modules and had fun results. Is that a bad idea for me to try? There's nothing wrong with doing this. The only thing to be careful of is that a lot of RPG modules have some manner of pre-planned storyline, which is antithetical to the Apocalypse World mode of play. If you're going to use a module, you want to ignore anything that looks the slightest bit railroady; look just at the characters, factions, and places involved; and possibly convert them into a bunch of fronts and custom moves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:The rules for monsters ganging up on a player is pretty straightforward too, just roll all the damage dice for all the monsters attacking and whatever monster gets the largest number is the damage that the player takes. If I remember correctly, that's an outdated rule. As far as I know, the current rule is: Roll damage for the monster with the highest damage, then add +1 for every other monster that is able to attack that character.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Dungeon World is closer to "Cops and Robbers" than to D&D: Fiction trumps over rules. So, if your players ignore the monsters and focus on one, what does your logic tell you it happens? In a d&d game, the monster would still attack on their turn, giving the players the chance to kill the single monster in one round. Do 2d6+23 damage, take a move action. In a DW game, your whole party just turned their backs to a bunch of angry goblins with pointy sticks. They charge just as you try to hit their friend, what do you do?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 08:29
|
|
|
I got mired in a bunch of life, so I forgot to post that The Illusionist is now on sale! I'll post the .PDF in here later today when I get home from work (and when I remember). I think now that I have a couple classes under my belt, I'm going to start working on a class that's a bit bigger in scope. It's going to be called The Conduit. Inspired by job systems of Final Fantasy (especially FFX-2), the idea is that there are several compendium class-sized playbooks that you can switch to, representing different spirits inhabiting your body. I think the full class will have 8 "jobs," 4 that you start with and 4 you can unlock through advances. There will be some restrictions, of course - you have to revert back to your "base" class first, you can only switch to a job once, then once you've used most of them, access is open to you again, that kind of thing. Hopefully it'll be fun and not a big mess like it easily could be.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
Mounted Combat will probably hit the web within this week. I got the cover in yesterday. (This is not April Fools, and it would be a really weak one if it was.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Spincut posted:I got mired in a bunch of life, so I forgot to post that The Illusionist is now on sale! I'll post the .PDF in here later today when I get home from work (and when I remember). That seems a bit harsh, why not make job switching a roll for hold? That imposes a limit while still keeping flexibility (which I assume is a goal of this class)
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:That seems a bit harsh, why not make job switching a roll for hold? That imposes a limit while still keeping flexibility (which I assume is a goal of this class) I assume you mean you would roll for hold, then spend that hold on the job's moves? That's something I'll keep in mind. The main thing is I don't want to step on other class' toes in terms of roles. I don't know if that's even going to be a problem, though, so I need to tinker with stuff. Thanks for the input!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:Ergonomix has given me permission to post a major update I've been working on to The Mastermind (mediafire link here). Came about because I'm getting close to Level 10 with his original Mastermind in a long-running campaign and started running out of moves. I'm about to post an update to this, but I was wondering if anyone who has played or seen played the current iteration of The Mastermind would like to give me some feedback? Current Scheduled Changes (Link to the update DRAFT copy): - Defining the Disguise Kit mechanically (thanks to Gnome7 for the kit item) - Changing Headquarters into an Advanced Move, as its power level seems to fit there much better... - Cleanup of unclear or useless tags from Headquarters - Remove My Secret Lair, HQ points now scale with level instead - Removing the mechanical crunch / bonuses from Plans Never Survive Contact With The Enemy, works better as a narrative control move - Rephrasing moves to 7+ and 6- instead of "hit" and "miss" - Changing the My Loyal Lieutenant move so that the servant tracks damage taken separately, because the shared hp move cribbed from The Noble is incredibly clunky Considering: - Removing some 6- consequences from moves? I'm really unsure about this, because whether 6- consequences on moves are good or not really depends how on-the-ball a GM is about making their own moves. By the rules the GM is supposed to make their own move even if the move already lists a 6-, so 6- stuff in a playbook is mostly cinematic direction, so to speak, but that also makes it unnecessary and potentially confusing window dressing. - With eleven 2-5 moves and eight 6-10 moves, I'm trying to figure out what to swap to 6-10, but it wouldn't worry me to leave it as is. edit: moved Boom. to 6-10 TheDemon fucked around with this message at 05:58 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
Spincut posted:The Conduit...FF job system
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:I'm about to post an update to this, but I was wondering if anyone who has played or seen played the current iteration of The Mastermind would like to give me some feedback? I just started playing one in PbP on another forum. I wish I could say I had anything to really report, but we literally just started and I've triggered exactly one move so far (Defying Danger to use the Disguise Kit without being noticed). That being said, the DK should have some "ammo" to it, and the player should probably be required to describe their kit. I don't think disguising really warrants a starting move, because I don't see that as necessarily being fundamental to supervillainy. Maybe there's a drive that confers it, perhaps in place of My Loyal Servant (though still allowing you to take it later, of course)? Making the Headquarters an advanced move makes me sad, because it's so awesome, but having HQ points scale with player level makes perfect sense. Boom. seems like it could be a 6-10 move. Hopefully I can help more as the game progresses!
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:I'm about to post an update to this, but I was wondering if anyone who has played or seen played the current iteration of The Mastermind would like to give me some feedback? You could use the Disguise Kit mechanic that the Masked Mage has, for consistency between content: Disguise Kit 3 uses, slow, 2 weight, 50 coin A disguise kit can be used to produce clothing, makeup, wigs, and anything else you might need for an impromptu disguise. When you take a few minutes to put on a disguise, spend 1-use of this kit and tell us what role you are impersonating (such as chef, doctor, guard, etc). You look like a generic member of that role and will be mistaken as one by anyone who doesn't know better, unless you give them evidence to doubt your disguise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
I considered that but the main difference is the Mastermind has always been about disguising yourself as specific NPCs rather than generic ones. There's even advanced moves that rely on this. So I can't really use that kit, even if I really like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
You could use the generic kit, and reword the move to "When you use a disguise kit, you can disguise as a specific person instead of a generic type of person. Everyone will think you are that person unless you give them evidence otherwise."
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Hey, are there any limits on what kind of species a druid can shapechange into? Say he's a forest druid. Can he turn into a forest dragon? A brownie? An elf?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
psychopomp posted:Hey, are there any limits on what kind of species a druid can shapechange into? Say he's a forest druid. Can he turn into a forest dragon? A brownie? An elf? Technically speaking, the limits are what's listed in the move ("any species whose essence you have studied or who lives in your land"). But as a GM I might ask the druid to Spout Lore about whatever exotic species he's trying to shapeshift into before I let him do so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:...as a GM I might ask the druid to Spout Lore about whatever exotic species he's trying to shapeshift into before I let him do so. I wouldn't do this, because it then becomes two rolls for one action, which I don't feel should ever be a thing in Dungeon World.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
KillerQueen posted:I wouldn't do this, because it then becomes two rolls for one action, which I don't feel should ever be a thing in Dungeon World. I don't really agree; two rolls is a great way to make something more special or riskier. It's quite common to ask for Defy Danger along with another roll, say, for something like attacking an enemy with an active defense like spikes or whirling razor wires or whatever. Nor does failing Spout Lore prevent the Shapeshift move from being used anyway. Going away from the rules a bit, it's likely that the Druid and the GM are going to cooperate on the shapeshift form and its moves anyway. Spout Lore just kind of... fits? for figuring out what an exotic creature might involve. gnome7 posted:You could use the generic kit, and reword the move to "When you use a disguise kit, you can disguise as a specific person instead of a generic type of person. Everyone will think you are that person unless you give them evidence otherwise." Oh, duh, creating an exception is totally a thing I can do with a move. Thanks gnome! Something Else posted:I just started playing one in PbP on another forum. I wish I could say I had anything to really report, but we literally just started and I've triggered exactly one move so far (Defying Danger to use the Disguise Kit without being noticed). That being said, the DK should have some "ammo" to it, and the player should probably be required to describe their kit. I don't think disguising really warrants a starting move, because I don't see that as necessarily being fundamental to supervillainy. Maybe there's a drive that confers it, perhaps in place of My Loyal Servant (though still allowing you to take it later, of course)? Making the Headquarters an advanced move makes me sad, because it's so awesome, but having HQ points scale with player level makes perfect sense. Boom. seems like it could be a 6-10 move. I've heard the same thought from other sources, that the Disguise Kit should have ammo/uses, which also meshes with the DK from other classes, so that's definitely in. As for a starting move, well, it's already in the starting gear which is practically a set of moves anyway. I can definitely consider moving better disguising to the Sneaky style, but although disguising isn't essential to supervillainy, I've never once seen this class played without disguising. But that's why I really want player feedback! So thanks, you've been a big help. And I'd appreciate if anyone else who's played The Mastermind also gives their review.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:20
|
|