|
I'll be running my first session of this tomorrow for my group. This will be our first time playing DW. I'm looking at running Indigo Galleon- any advice for the adventure/for a first time DM?
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
Never have a roll where nothing happens. If somebody asks you a question and you don't think Spout Lore or Discern Realities really apply, you can just answer them, but for bonus points ask the question back at them and roll with the answer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Does anyone else have the problem where you'll ask your players a question about the world and they'll go blank? Questions like "So you walk into the tavern. Mr. Wizard, who is the most interesting-looking person you spot in here?" or "Sir Rogue, what is something this town is well-known for?" will give my players a lot of trouble. My players have fairly simple characters with minimal backstories who tend to be player-inserts. Likewise, they seem to prefer that the story be structured, and won't try to make up their own path. So far, every time I've introduced a strange creature or place and asked a character if they've had any experience with it in the past, they've said no, because they, the player, aren't familiar with it and would rather decline. Basically, the relationship seems to be that the world is for me to define, not them. I'm fine with this dynamic if they prefer it this way, but since Dungeon World's rulebook encourages group-creation so much, I'd like to ease them into answering worldbuilding questions more easily rather than not ask questions at all. Does anyone else have this problem? Are the sort of questions I'm asking too vague?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
Cephas posted:Does anyone else have this problem? Are the sort of questions I'm asking too vague? Those questions are fine, and that reaction is unfortunately common in people who've only ever played rules-heavy games. Your best bet is to just have a chat with them and tell them that they're expected to just make up answers, and that you'll roll with those answers. You should roll with them regardless of how stupid they are - the "giving stupid answers for kicks" phase should end pretty quickly when players realise that you're actually letting them have creative input. Another thing you can do is play a game of Fiasco before playing Dungeon World, just to get them in the mood.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
I've put together a basic moves cheatsheet based on gnome7's original, which I found a bit hard to read on normal sized paper. It's only the basic moves and most of the special moves (missing a few for space reasons, like the looking-for-hirelings one and the one that gives you preparation). Requires Minion Pro, Copperplate Gothic, and OpenOffice to open. Hope this helps some other first-time GMs out there!
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
Cephas posted:Does anyone else have this problem? Are the sort of questions I'm asking too vague? Tailor your questions to your group- if they have trouble with open ended questions, ask them short, pointed questions that they have to answer. So lead them with questions that suggest a more targeted answer but are functionally the same: "you can't help but notice the old man in the corner - why is your eye drawn to him?" Or even more pointed "the man's behavior seems odd... And you can't look away. What is he doing?" You can tailor your questions to fit the tone and you can make assumptions the players need to follow through with. Assert some facts to lead the player when you encounter that strange monster: "you recognize this beast - you've been hunting this one for a while - why?" Think about how your questions can inspire the players! Don't make the questions too open ended - limitations breed creativity. Start your questions before the session begins by asking about how players relate to each other - "what's the most annoying thing he does?" "Your bond says you hate him - what do you find most agreeable about him?" "She saved your bacon last time - how does that make you feel?" Your player's emotions can be just as fruitful for setting creation and role play as the places they go. Some questions are not good setting questions. Think of questions like "what is the town called?" Or "what is his name?" These are the sorts of things that put people on the spot and are so enormously loaded that I've seen players refuse to answer. There's a reason you find all these name generators online. That's why questions like asking about the tone of a place you've just got to are hard. Ask about details: "this town smells funny, but you think you recognize the source - what is it?" "Most of the laborers in this town dress the same, wearing clothes you recognize. They have the same profession as your father - what is it?" Shamblercow fucked around with this message at 19:50 on Jun 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
An example of this: My party is flying an airship over a mountain range (a task none have ever successfully achieved in the setting [which I said, but probably should've left open ended for them to answer]). On the roll to accomplish it, I introduced a complication of one of the engines failing and the gears jamming. The party essentially made some assumptions about the situation, namely that the gears had iced over (I never said anything about icing) and I ran with it. On the one hand, I feel a little uncomfortable letting others build upon a world I made myself. On the other, it makes things more enjoyable for everyone and can fill in blanks you didn't expect there to be. But all of us are pretty much used to the GM dictating everything and the Players merely reactive actors. My next set of questions for the players include: What do you know about ghouls? (actually, I should've described them and let the players make the assumptions on what they were) (to the Cleric) How does your god feel about the enslavement of undead? What do you know about the old empire? Xelkelvos fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Jun 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
I've heard making it multiple choice works well too, if players are struggling. Like "You recognise this man from a previous adventure. Was he a friend or an enemy, back then?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:On the roll to accomplish it, I introduced a complication of one of the engines failing and the gears jamming. The party essentially made some assumptions about the situation, namely that the gears had iced over (I never said anything about icing) and I ran with it. With something like that I'd have a solid thing that is going wrong rather than going along with what the players assume at that moment. They like being surprised after all, and it can lead to some fun situations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
General information for people who've written playbooks: the Italian translators for DW are printing a second edition and they're rotating the third-party classes they're including: https://plus.google.com/+EzioMelega/posts/S512QZ6RDqc (this isn't a paying thing, you just get the satisfaction of seeing your class in print in another language). The first edition had my Shaman, gnome's Dashing Hero and a Sorcerer playbook (madadric, was that yours?). Obviously, you can only submit classes you've written, but it'd be great if their second edition had, say, the Slayer, the Initiate v2, the Gladiator, or any other of the really good playbooks in the OP. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 12:34 on Jun 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 12:31
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:General information for people who've written playbooks: the Italian translators for DW are printing a second edition and they're rotating the third-party classes they're including: https://plus.google.com/+EzioMelega/posts/S512QZ6RDqc (this isn't a paying thing, you just get the satisfaction of seeing your class in print in another language). It wasn't my Sorcerer, I'm pretty sure the Italian Edition came out before my Feelings Mage. It may have been an Italian original class? I've submitted all my classes for the new edition, so it will be interesting to see what they pick, with such a huge variety to choose from. Ezio's a cool person, and pretty straightforward if you have any questions. The art in the first edition was super slick, too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 14:23
|
|
|
Since my party's approaching the vampire front in a session or two, I made some rules for using the ripple from JoJo's Bizarre Adventure for shits and giggles. Might not even use it depending on how it all goes down, but I'd like to get an opinion about it before I would release it on the PCs.quote:When you spend roughly two weeks training beneath a ripple master, increase your ripple dice size by one. If you had none to begin with, start at a d2.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Gut reaction is don't use d2, especially in a PbtA system. I don't even like DW damage dice--too swingy. Why not just use a d6 for ripple?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
IMO, you should start with CON Hold for Ripple energy and regain it whenever you have a moment to breathe and rest (al the Wizard and Cleric when they refresh their spells). Training allows them to hold twice CON or something. I'd meld the last two moves into one large move. It also needs the condition concerning breathing. I'd probably do it something like this for the individual players: quote:Channel the Ripple: As long as you can breathe steadily and your bloodflow is unimpeded, you can channel and control Ripple energy. When you spend uninterrupted time (an hour or so) meditating and breathing, reduce your Ripple to 0 and gain +CON Ripple. And then a separate move entry for the Ripple detailing its effects. Namely that it affects anything the same as though it were affected by sunlight and enhances the damage of any object charged with Ripple energy by +1d6.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 07:08
|
|
|
So this might be a dumb question, but does anybody have any Scribus templates for making a playbook? I've gotten the InDesign ones from Sage's Github, Scribus hates those, I have the Word and Open Office templates, but Scribus hates those too. Importing a pdf made from the Open Office template just turns it into a mess. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:IMO, you should start with CON Hold for Ripple energy and regain it whenever you have a moment to breathe and rest (al the Wizard and Cleric when they refresh their spells). Training allows them to hold twice CON or something. I'll definitely use something like this instead, never occurred to me to use the prepare spells move. I considered making it a CON roll but that'd only make my Fighter be competent fighting vampires, however training making them hold twice would be a good solution to this. I also forgot to add that breath qualifier! That's important. Thanks for the help, and I'll revise the rules based on what's been said to post them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
Wasn't there a Jojo CC? I swear I remember that being a thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
Seems so, now that I look for one: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yG-tP2eBzNdyHul--t8vRbKnjNApypRLwRSW7bXEpOA/edit
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Does anyone have, or know of, a compendium class that does kinda artificery thing? So gadgets and tech and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Arashiofordo3 posted:Does anyone have, or know of, a compendium class that does kinda artificery thing? So gadgets and tech and stuff. I've seen a Gadgeteer CC floating around somewhere, and I'm working on a Trapmaster CC that might work, or could serve as a basis for further tinkering. Error 404 fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Jun 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
Arashiofordo3 posted:Does anyone have, or know of, a compendium class that does kinda artificery thing? So gadgets and tech and stuff. It'd be pretty simple to cut some moves out of The Artificer playbook to make a CC, wouldn't it? It's how I often end up making CCs for my campaigns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
Spekhogger posted:Seems so, now that I look for one: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yG-tP2eBzNdyHul--t8vRbKnjNApypRLwRSW7bXEpOA/edit Hey I made that thing! I also made the much worse one beneath it. Still think the Ripple Man is good though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
Arashiofordo3 posted:Does anyone have, or know of, a compendium class that does kinda artificery thing? So gadgets and tech and stuff. Just take a bunch of moves from the Artificer to make a CC class with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Spekhogger posted:I'll definitely use something like this instead, never occurred to me to use the prepare spells move. I considered making it a CON roll but that'd only make my Fighter be competent fighting vampires, however training making them hold twice would be a good solution to this. I also forgot to add that breath qualifier! That's important. Characteristically speaking, it takes individuals of healthy stature to really use the Ripple. That quality is linked to Constitution. It would make sense that the Fighter is the first in line to be able to pick it up though, given the series. And it's not as though the Fighter can't charge weapons for other party member to use with Ripple or the Cleric or Wizard harness sunlight in some fashion for after dark use.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
Considering canonical Ripple Training involved things like multi-day pillar climbs and learning to breathe by inhaling for ten minutes followed by exhaling for twenty it's pretty much a clear case of a +Con situation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
So I'm on my second draft of an attempt at a free-form magic casting class that is more reminiscent of Mage, or Ars Magica, (or a funky ye olde fantasy-land Unknown Armies) than your usual Vancian Caster classes. LINK TO SHARED FOLDER - Luminary Adept mkII I have three different versions of the Playbook in that folder:
It's still pretty rough in places, but aside from needing some more trimming and editing, it's pretty much playable. Thoughts? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 09:59
|
|
|
It seems neat. The only glaring problem I have is that the alignments are a bit poor. Neutral isn't very neutral, and chaotic and evil seem a bit uninspired. For neutral, since your playbook is so inspired by balance, I'd suggest "Strike a balance between two extremes." For chaotic and evil, I'd say something like: "Achieve a goal with disproportionate measures" and "Gain someone's power for yourself" or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 10:57
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:Considering canonical Ripple Training involved things like multi-day pillar climbs and learning to breathe by inhaling for ten minutes followed by exhaling for twenty it's pretty much a clear case of a +Con situation. Of course, what we're doing already isn't canon to JoJo. If I had to bend the concept a bit in order to work I would, but it looks like it'll still be a CON roll. And also everyone at my table only knows about the series through me so I don't want to push it down their throats (at least, not in an uncomfortable manner). Error 404 posted:So I'm on my second draft of an attempt at a free-form magic casting class that is more reminiscent of Mage, or Ars Magica, (or a funky ye olde fantasy-land Unknown Armies) than your usual Vancian Caster classes. This looks radical, I'll have to spend some time reading it before I give any sort of opinion or thought to play it! I love more spooky, mystical wizards. Only thing I can say so far is that's a little odd to have a wizard with a long sword, but like I said I've only glanced over it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
Spekhogger posted:This looks radical, I'll have to spend some time reading it before I give any sort of opinion or thought to play it! I love more spooky, mystical wizards. Only thing I can say so far is that's a little odd to have a wizard with a long sword, but like I said I've only glanced over it. The longsword is in there mostly for giggles, because almost every wizardy class sticks to staff and/or knife. The benefit of my mage is that their magic is not specifically tied to +INT (even though some magic empowered moves might be), so muscle wizards are definitely a possible thing. Edit: also what Lem said. Error 404 fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Why would you not give your wizard a longsword? Gandalf had one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
Aren't the four implements of magic wands, swords, cups, and pentacles or something anyway
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
basically what i'm saying is I want to play a wizard who destroys his enemies with magic pentacle coins
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Tollymain posted:basically what i'm saying is I want to play a wizard who destroys his enemies with magic pentacle coins Note to self: add a spot in the gear section for a Personal Talisman (0 weight) describe it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Tollymain posted:basically what i'm saying is I want to play a wizard who destroys his enemies with magic pentacle coins Is your wizard playbook literally Gambit? If not get the gently caress out forever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Tollymain posted:basically what i'm saying is I want to play a wizard who destroys his enemies with magic pentacle coins Guess I should keep working on my Tarot Reader playbook, then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
No denying that wizards with swords are pretty drat sweet, yeah. I do really love the idea of making spells for the situation at hand, more so than choosing from a list for sure, so I hope to play with the Luminary Adept sheet sometime. So far it looks fun, even if some of the alignment options could be more interesting. Edit: Also, here's the revised bits of the Ripple moves, with thanks to Xelkelvos: quote:Ripple Training: When you spend one full month training beneath a Ripple master, you gain +1 every time you Channel the Ripple. (max +3) Spekhogger fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Spekhogger posted:No denying that wizards with swords are pretty drat sweet, yeah. Luminary Adept pg. 2: Gear Section posted:
 And the cool thing about the spells (imo) is that they end up looking very similar to how regular moves are already triggered. you declare you effect in the form of a statement: I am Harming that monster... I am Altering that campfire... the rest is just The Fiction, enhanced by tags, and a cost in Focus. It's extremely flexible while keeping it from being overwhelmingly 'caster supremacy'. You only start out with 4 basic Effect "verbs". Later advanced moves add 3 more and finally 2 more, respectively. So each Adept is limited in exactly how they do stuff. They also end up being fairly diverse because two Adepts who have made different choices for their effects verbs are going to operate very differently.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
Got to say I love the mechanics. I'm also rather a fan of the expanded backgrounds concept. Not taken the time to read through it fully, but I'll probably grab the lot of them and take a better read through later.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
quote:[ ]Leather Armor (2 armor, 1 weight) That's some seriously awesome leather armor! But seriously, this is the second time I've seen this in a new playbook recently: 2 armor with no clumsy tag. This is either a very minor oversight that should be corrected, or power creep that should be stopped, because it's pointless and tedious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
Walker on the Path of Ash and Bone is is generally good. Initiate of Blood Magic is pretty dry and boring. The Non-Euclidean Acolyte is generally good. Akashic Theosopher has some interesting moves which probably wouldn't translate into a game too well - eg. Split the River for reasons outline below. Shaman of the Abyssal Dark is cool. Protean Venatori is really cool (my favourite), but far too complicated. Ceteri is great. Apprentice of the Silver Hand is great except for the move which requires you to spend XP, which is abominable for that same reason. Keeper of the Inner Light is boring like the Blood Magic one - it's just number-adders. • You should never have rolled moves whose function is purely to provide bonuses to other rolled moves. No "roll this, and if you roll well you get a bonus to rolling this." eg. 'I can beat the Reaper at his own game', 'Cryptologia', → You should never have to roll twice to perform what is essentially one move. More broadly, avoid moves which allow one player to act repeatedly while the others do nothing, eg. 'Split the River'. • +2 is a really huge bonus. I never give bonuses or penalties of more than 1. Check out this cool graph for more info on dice probabilities. → More generally, fiction first means bonuses and penalties can only take you so far. They lose meaning beyond +/- 3, and I'd argue beyond +/- 2. If someone's at a huge disadvantage to do something, have them Defy Danger (eg. Running on broken legs) or bar them from doing it altogether (eg. Running with no legs). If someone's at a huge advantage to do something, they can do it without a roll. • Some of your moves are far too specific and in some cases redundant. For instance, get rid of the options to do with mimicking other people from 'Mask of a Thousand Faces' (ie. The last three) and leave that function to 'Doppelganger'. → More specifically - you should generally write move results in terms of the outcomes they can achieve rather than what they can do. That's a really abstract difference so here's an example: Rather than these options like "Make general cosmetic changes like eye, hair, and skin color" or "Alter general height, weight, gender, and build" (Why are these two different things?) for 'Mask of a Thousand Faces', try something like this: "On a 10+, you're unrecognisable. On a 7-9, you retain an identifying mark and you will encounter someone who recognises you for who you are." • Rather than saying "You always take the 10+ result" on something, say they're immune to it (eg. 'Perfectly Centred' makes you immune to spiritual and mental influence) or make them better at it, like the Fighter's 'Bend Bars, Lift Gates'. • Spending XP is always really really bad, no matter which game you're designing for. Don't make people pick between being weak and lovely and having cool stuff which won't refund your XP when it's gone. You're from the WoD thread, you should know this! • Quick move analysis: 'Spirit Touched' - "You may interact and Parley with spirits as if they were people." The other PC's can't? Why not? Provide a short, evocative reason. "Your knowledge of the spirit language counts as leverage in a Parley with a spirit." Why? Where possible, avoid using mechanical terms in favour of fiction. → Consider this: "You have mastered the ruinous tongue of the Abyssal subspirits. You can speak to them without losing your mind, and the smaller ones have a deferential respect/hunger for you." Always go for wet, evocative, imprecise language. • Rewrite of 'Seventh Step of Inertial Alacrity': "So long as you run as fast as you can, you can run along walls and ceilings." → I actually did the same thing as you've done with the BCCs a few months ago with a playbook based on Exalted's Infernals. Check out 'Wind-Born Stride' and 'Racing Vitaris' under Adorjan! Steal anything you want. Bigup DJ fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 01:30
|
|