|
Really Pants posted:Where can I find that ship stuff? Found it ! https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxMeX65J47dhNTNYZXNxRkNHcWM/view
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:59 |
|
|
That's my ship stuff  Oh well, we'll see how it goes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 12:01
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:That's my ship stuff Think of it as we're picking up the game and trying to make something workable out of the unfinished framework. We'll just have to improvise a lot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 13:45
|
|
|
If we end up with a more workable and playable version of the game for everyone else to enjoy, would that really be the worst outcome? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:If we end up with a more workable and playable version of the game for everyone else to enjoy, would that really be the worst outcome? That's certainly what I'm thinking. It's missing some pretty core stuff, like I'm not seeing a basic move that would allow someone to hurt another person, unless you're trying to steal something. But even then it's unclear if that's what that move is supposed to be for. Buncha tag explanations are missing, there's also some inconsistency in what you should be rolling. "Will" gets mentioned a few times, but I think that's supposed to be Warp? I like what they've got and I like their classes. I just feels like they skipped to the good bits and half arsed their core mechanics. For instance. You can only defy danger one way with one stat, Bold. When as far as I can see, every other game gives you an option for each stat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
Arashiofordo3 posted:That's certainly what I'm thinking. It's missing some pretty core stuff, like I'm not seeing a basic move that would allow someone to hurt another person, unless you're trying to steal something. But even then it's unclear if that's what that move is supposed to be for. "Seize by force" is intentionally vague--maybe the thing you're trying to seize is a possession, maybe it's an enemy-held location, maybe it's just victory or the upper hand in general, maybe it's the enemy's BLOOD AND SKULLS 
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Arashiofordo3 posted:For instance. You can only defy danger one way with one stat, Bold. When as far as I can see, every other game gives you an option for each stat. Apoc World does this. Act Under Fire has you only rolling Sharp. It works pretty well imo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Apoc World does this. Act Under Fire has you only rolling Sharp. Ahh, the game I never play. Figures :p
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:"Seize by force" is intentionally vague--maybe the thing you're trying to seize is a possession, maybe it's an enemy-held location, maybe it's just victory or the upper hand in general, maybe it's the enemy's BLOOD AND SKULLS This exactly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:"Seize by force" is intentionally vague--maybe the thing you're trying to seize is a possession, maybe it's an enemy-held location, maybe it's just victory or the upper hand in general, maybe it's the enemy's BLOOD AND SKULLS To be honest, this is one of the ones that always kinda confused me about regular AW. When do I Go Aggro vs Seize by Force? Should Aggro just be for threats and intimidation, or is beating people up also? Does one seize information from someone through aggressive intimidation? Is there an intentional overlap between the two? Both are +hard so it works either way...
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:To be honest, this is one of the ones that always kinda confused me about regular AW. When do I Go Aggro vs Seize by Force? Should Aggro just be for threats and intimidation, or is beating people up also? Does one seize information from someone through aggressive intimidation? Is there an intentional overlap between the two? Both are +hard so it works either way... That's not how it works. Always go fiction first. Describe the action, then figure out what move's best for it. In PbtA you never do this the other way around. This also has to be the specific action the character's performing, right now, in the fiction of the game. The entire point of the stats+moves backbone is to avoid reducing the roleplaying experience to a list of action verbs that you pick from. This means that any one action, say, intimidating someone, can be any one move – from acting under fire to looking for barter in the town market. The move that'll trigger depends on how and why that action is being done, not on what action is being done. That said: go aggro when you threaten violence, by any means whatsoever (up to and including violence itself). In a situation where the player rolls for going aggro, they're implying an immediate future where violence may or may not happen; the entire snowball of consequences from the move is based on that one fact. Seize by force when you want something someone has, they know you want it, you're willing to hurt for it, they're willing to hurt to hold on to it. In a situation where the player rolls for seizing by force, they're implying a future where violence is a fact, and everyone's bracing themselves to get hurt and hurt back, already. Error 404 posted:Apoc World does this. Act Under Fire has you only rolling Sharp.  Actually, the fact that in AW you can only act under fire if you're cool – being tough, smart, hot or bizarre won't help you at all – is quite a subtle bit of world-building that helps set the tone of the game better than cars or guns or psychic storms can. It's also worth remembering that the first game to allow multiple stats for the generic 'avoid dangerous situation' move was Dungeon World, a game where the stats are D&D-derived and thus based on characteristics of the PCs like strength and intelligence. AW's stats are more abstract, being better described as the amount of success you can get with a kind of approach. Then a lot of the games that came later use AW-style stats and a DW-style defy danger move. I'm not sure it works very well, to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
Cyphoderus posted:
I think rolling for damage and DW-style Defy Danger are DW's worst qualities.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Cyphoderus posted:That's not how it works. Always go fiction first. Describe the action, then figure out what move's best for it. In PbtA you never do this the other way around. Sure, sure, I get the first part. What I mean is in "We both know I got here first and that lux gear there is mine, now scram or I'll shoot you dead," type situations. There's definitely an attempt at intimidation and a threat of violence, but there's also the attempt to take something from someone else via (perhaps) violent means. Should you instead wait to see how the other person reacts before determining which move it would trigger, if any?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:To be honest, this is one of the ones that always kinda confused me about regular AW. When do I Go Aggro vs Seize by Force? Should Aggro just be for threats and intimidation, or is beating people up also? Does one seize information from someone through aggressive intimidation? Is there an intentional overlap between the two? Both are +hard so it works either way... The answer is almost always Go Aggro. Seize by Force is used only in situations where you have two forces with weapons drawn fighting it out over something. It could easily have been an optional combat move. You can use Go Aggro to deal harm just fine, and I use the move for just that routinely unless the harm has already been set up with some other move (like doing something under fire to get into an advantageous position) in which case I might just allow the harm to be done outright. If a character just walks up to an unarmed mechanic and decides to punch him in the face, well they're going aggro and what they want is for the other character to get his face smashed in. If the character decides to drag the mechanic off and interrogate him at gunpoint, but his buddies show up carrying blowtorches and wrenches and you're suddenly in a standoff with the poor sod in the middle... Then it's seize by force. Cyphoderus posted:That's not how it works. Always go fiction first. Describe the action, then figure out what move's best for it. In PbtA you never do this the other way around. No, you can totally say you want to go aggro and then describe action to go with it afterwards. The clue is that you cannot do one without the other, no matter the order. Toph Bei Fong posted:What I mean is in "We both know I got here first and that lux gear there is mine, now scram or I'll shoot you dead," type situations. There's definitely an attempt at intimidation and a threat of violence, but there's also the attempt to take something from someone else via (perhaps) violent means. Should you instead wait to see how the other person reacts before determining which move it would trigger, if any? Do you mean it? Like, will you actually shoot him if he does not give it up? If so: Go Aggro. If not: Manipulate. Are you guys both actually shooting at each other over who gets this thing at this very moment? If so, and only then: Sieze by Fire. thotsky fucked around with this message at 22:08 on Sep 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
Biomute posted:The answer is almost always Go Aggro. Seize by Force is used only in situations where you have two forces with weapons drawn fighting it out over something. It could easily have been an optional combat move. I agree with the second part but not the first. SBF is equally deserving of being a basic move. I typically end up in situations where I use it a lot more than GA. As has been said, you can seize almost anything. The jingle, the element of surprise, the advantage, rolfball's gun, etc. It sets the stakes in much the same way Read a Sitch does in that if the situation wasn't charged, it is now. Nothing wrong with GA at all, but SBF deserves the place it has.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
I've effortposted on this before, so here's what I've had to say about it:Captain Foo posted:This is definitely a Go Aggro situation. Captain Foo posted:Well, any specific situations that come up you should direct to me ( Captain Foo posted:Scrape, so in your understanding of the moves, my example of "gently caress you" draws and fires doesn't provide enough information to actually determine which move it is? Reason hadn't failed per se, it wasn't even attempted. Captain Foo posted:I definitely like what you're saying (and your other posts too), but I still want to go through this line of thinking. Isn't Go Aggro "I want something OR I will hurt you?" Manipulate with violence as leverage is "I want something, and I could hurt you if I don't get it." Seize is "I want something AND I am hurting you to get it." tl;dr Go Aggro is "I want something OR I will hurt you." Manipulate with violence as leverage is "I want something, and I could hurt you if I don't get it." Seize is "I want something AND I am hurting you to get it."
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 22:09
|
|
) but given what you said - if you were to say "hey rear end in a top hat," draw and fire, that's Seize By Force. If you were to say "hey rear end in a top hat," draw and not fire, that's Go Aggro.
|
double post but I wanna be clear that I am not trying to shut down this discussion! It's an important one to have.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:I agree with the second part but not the first. I believe Vincent has set the record straight in regards to the whole "you can seize his meat / implying that you can size anything" quote, and that it's explicitly a move for two-way combat over concrete things. Seize an advantageous position during a firefight? Sure! Seize someones love/the element of surprise/the limelight? No. You don't use seize by force to take someones gun unless they're currently aiming it at you/firing it at you or otherwise engaged in combat with you. Outside of combat that would be acting under fire if done stealthily, go aggro if done violently, or manipulate if done socially. This dichotomy is reflected in the move itself. When seizing stuff by force you're likely to take harm, because it's only done in outright combat, and in outright combat you're likely to take harm. Having to take harm to gain the element of surprise (which implies that it is before combat) makes no sense at all. Captain Foo posted:tl;dr Go Aggro can also be "I want to hurt you, so I will". thotsky fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Sep 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Meh Foo put it better than I did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
This is a really good discussion, and much clearer than it is in the book. Thanks y'all!
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
John Harper is generally a really good resource for clear interpretations/summaries of some of the harder to grok parts of apocalypse world: http://mightyatom.blogspot.no/2010/11/aw-seize-by-force-is-peripheral-move.html
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:Does anyone know if Rogue Trader: Apocalypse ever got finished? It's a slightly different approach but if you're interested in "poor people in a spaceship try to make money" check out [u]r="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4w2ZvCSYT6AbndvOFhfb2RTc1U"]Impulse Drive[/url] It's still in development and playtesting, and the ship stuff is a little rough, but it's playable right now. Disclaimer: I wrote it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Another way to see SBF is "I want something, and I am hurting myself in order to get it."
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Who created the Daemon? It's an amazing skin, unsigned, and I've never seen it before.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Who created the Daemon? Wow, I don't normally like Monster Hears, It doesn't appeal to me in the slightest. But I can appreciate what they're doing with that one. Just the whole taking damage mechanic to get successes on roles. That's pretty awesome. Whoever made that one really should have signed it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
What does everyone think of PbtA games that go stat-less? I did it for Justice Friends because I felt Golden Age Superheroes didn't differentiate themselves enough thus stats wouldn't work to the game's benefit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 14:56
|
|
|
Covok posted:What does everyone think of PbtA games that go stat-less? I did it for Justice Friends because I felt Golden Age Superheroes didn't differentiate themselves enough thus stats wouldn't work to the game's benefit. The main values of stats are 1) rolls for things outside the moves that might still be differentiable by character-as-played-in-the-fiction, and 2) differentiating characters within the same playbook, across campaigns or within the same one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Who created the Daemon? I'm pretty sure that's one of Megane's skins. Just wanna say that the Circle Too Many is brilliant. Covok posted:What does everyone think of PbtA games that go stat-less? I did it for Justice Friends because I felt Golden Age Superheroes didn't differentiate themselves enough thus stats wouldn't work to the game's benefit. It's a valid design choice that works for some games, like your four color heroes, but I think that there's merit in keeping stats for others.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
Flavivirus posted:Yup, Legacy's mine Hey there, I saw the Echoes of the Fall supplement to Legacy that became available yesterday (three more playbooks, some other extras) and got it since I liked Legacy My only complaint is that the listed DrivethruRPG page count is 124 while actually it's ~40.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
Foglet posted:Hey there, I saw the Echoes of the Fall supplement to Legacy that became available yesterday (three more playbooks, some other extras) and got it since I liked Legacy Whoops! Fixed it now. Glad you liked it!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:56
|
|
|
Been having quite a lot of fun running Night Witches. I took it up as a means for our regular GM to get a break and even though I don't have much experience GMing, the game makes it easy (and since I know WWII fairly well, it's easy for me to add detail). The game works really well for adding/dropping characters as well: we started with just me and two players (I haven't been doing the GM swapping thing so far) but we managed to get a new pilot in fairly easily. The game works well that way since the new characters will likely be worse, representing being green/the FNG. So far, we've done Engels airfield, Trud and are currently in Pashkovskaya. I like how they have a whole different flavour (although part of it is something that I did deliberately as a GM). Engels was all about being new/being unsure/evaluating each other, Trud was all about the misery of war/not having supplies. Pashkovskaya I've made into a NKVD nightmare: the current biggest drama is that the new pilot (the newest player in our group) found a deserter in a bombed out hospital nearby, brought him to the squadron leader (an NPC), the squadron leader tried to hide the deserter but the new pilot sent a letter out to her family speaking about the deserter, making the NKVD arrest the squadron leader. There's so much potential fallout that I was thinking all night about the possibilities. I'm thinking of blackmailing the new pilot in some way, which should be fun! There are a few things that I disliked about the system, though overall my opinion of it is very positive. Some of the consequences you have to choose for failure tend to make the missions feel slightly samey and because the choices of consequences are rather limited, it tends to lessen the impact of bad things happening somewhat. The mark system is good and although the distancing of what the mark actually does is deliberate in terms of game mechanisms, I wish the was a little bit more freedom in filling the gaps. They are minor criticisms though and overall I would recommend the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 11:37
|
|
|
I'm running AW this weekend and I think I had a cool idea for the setting: It’s based around the golden gate bridge, although they don’t know it yet. San Francisco is in ruins, the BloodGate bridge is populated by a powerful warlord and his lackeys (having built a shanty town that extends to the bottom of the bridge) and there’s a precarious network of roads built on top of big metal spikes crossing over the water, a pirate stronghold amongst said roads that resists BloodGate, and a bunch of settlements around the bay that pay tribute to one or the other. Oh, and the water bursts into loving flames every nightfall. There’s something weird going on that causes the highly gasoline-polluted water to start burning every night. These are the questions I’m going to ask my players, and I was wondering if Goons could think of more questions to add to the list. -What inhabits the ruins of the nearby city that make settling in a lethal idea? -Who’s Bloodgate’s leader? what’s he/she like? -What’s the external threat that worries the min-ds of the Firewater Bay settlers? -What’s the internal threat that grows, hidden, in Firewater Bay? -What’s the barter system in the Bay like?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 12:56
|
|
|
- Who can pass through the flames unscathed, and what did they have to pay to do so?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
What is waiting for someone to open the Bloodgate?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
What lies on the other side of the blood gate, and have you seen it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
What comes out of the fog that rolls in in the wee hours of the morning?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
 The Bloodgate is just the golden gate bridge and the "safest" way to cross from one shore to the other, but now I picture it as a giant spiky gate at the edge of reality. Mmmm.I was planning to name it the Bloodgate so that my players keep wondering why the bridge is called a gate, to later reveal that it was just mutated from its original name.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Hugoon Chavez posted:I'm running AW this weekend and I think I had a cool idea for the setting: awww yeeeah
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:59 |
|
|
Is there any AW hack that does "Settlers in a new land" well? Fantasy, historical, or sci-fi, doesn't entirely matter (Although my thought was originally sci-fi). Just, like, you have among the playbooks merchants and administrators, but there's still a need for explorers and fighters as well. Basic AW will work, but if there's something with a better fit, I'd be interested in knowing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 17:42
|
|
