|
I have some of those books but not enough of them, gonna grab this, thanks for the heads up.
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:50 |
|
|
slydingdoor posted:Instead of "only your belief can grant you victory" say "your paragon skills and abilities all but assure you victory... as long as you stay resolute" roll +3 and -Doubts. On a 7+, you triumph. On a 7-9, pick one..." slydingdoor posted:This isn't true at all, though I've seen it repeated here. Not unless the game is some combination of a never ending battle and a danger room scenario with an uninterrupted series of traps going off. Volley, Spout Lore, Discern Realities, Parley, Aid or Interfere (out of combat) and all the Special Moves cannot be replaced by Defy Danger, and the game would suck without them because the GM would constantly have to step in, and on the player's toes to resolve things that even D&D mechanizes better. slydingdoor posted:However, I do (still) think that for what I said before about the Basic Moves replacing/subsuming the Virtue moves can only be true if Rebuke is made more inclusive of alternative ways of communication, including actions speaking louder than words, and now that I look at it again is made more powerful. "On a 10+ gain 2 hold, on a 7-9 gain 1. Spend them, both on the same of the following if you want: --Remove a Doubt from you or them, in the Virtue you used or its opposite. --They Doubt the Virtue you used or its opposite."Then it, TM ,and the Combat Moves really would be able to replace... This comment, and some others I've gotten gave me pause. And I think the problem I'm not communicating my intention in the text well enough. I'll do that, and then see what needs to go in the text of the game, and where. As a Paragon, you're somewhere between human and superhuman. You're only really super when you're particularly adamant about a virtue - but you're always virtuous, otherwise you would never be super. The moments where you can do the real super stuff, as described in the pitch - those are mostly Transcendent Moment. I've actually changed the trigger to explicitly say "... to accomplish what would otherwise be impossible". TM is a very powerful move, but it has dire consequences - a Doubt on a 7-9, something terrible on a 6-. With great power comes spectacular catastrophic failure. So, if TM lets you do the impossible, we need to also define what that is, by showing what's available to you normally. This is why other moves exist - to show what is possible when you're not being all super. The Virtue Moves are there to show how you interact with the world, in the context of virtue. They are not super, but they're always good, and have few negative consequences. They definitely have limits in what you can do that are similar to DW characters' limits - maybe a little bit beyond (though, my god, some playbooks are ridiculously OP). If you want something more, it takes a Transcendent Moment, and the Virtue moves help guide you in which Virtue is relevant. The ideal exchange goes like this: quote:DM: The raiders are approaching, unhurried, weapons still dripping with the blood of the town guard. They look confident, bolstered by the knowledge that nothing stands between them and the defenseless townsfolk... except YOU! Amarita, what do you do? And lastly, where Background moves fit into this. Background moves represent the mere adventurer or hero you used to be, and the path you walked to get here. And so they are weak! They should either accomplish less than a virtue or combat move, or apply in a much more limited circumstance. Why have them at all? The main reason is simply to give characters definition and differentiation. So, to balance out them being weak, they should be specific and evocative - the information in them should guide how the player creates. Every Paragon can (probably) use Gentle Touch to directly attack the shaman who is whipping the orcs into a frenzy, but the Rogue might do it by gliding from shadow to shadow, and the Druid might do it by turning into an hawk, and diving at him from a clear sky, and the Backgrounds are there to convey those differences.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
Covok posted:I'm trying to get back into designing after a long break caused me to lose my steam. I decided to work on another Dungeon World custom class since I needed something small to do that I could finish and I'm currently reading DW for F&F. In short, you've forgotten why someone would want to play a character with this playbook. The only move that would really make me feel like someone who's trying to move on from an evil past but not entirely succeeding is Was The Dark. And from a fluff point of view, that move is absolutely brilliant. I'm not sure if it's too good or not, but I'm willing to let it slide on strength of flavor alone. Everything else feels... messy. Unfocused. What is the Repentant supposed to do better than anyone else? What is their player supposed to feel like? I don't really see any answers for either of these questions, so the character feels unfocused. Like a first draft you just threw together to keep a player happy until you could come up with something better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
potatocubed posted:Just on the off chance that anyone reading this doesn't already own everything in this bundle, the Bundle of Holding is doing a Dungeon World bundle that contains a giant stack of setting books and adventures: https://bundleofholding.com/presents/DungeonWorld2 Working my way through these- Last Days of Anglekite and Wizard Spawned Insanities are both really fun. Edit: reading Perilous Wild and there's a move for cooking and eating monsters! Vulpes Vulpes fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Jan 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Picked up that bundle. Pretty exciting looking stuff!
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Vulpes Vulpes posted:Working my way through these- Last Days of Anglekite and Wizard Spawned Insanities are both really fun.  This comes at the perfect time. Inverse World and Grim World too, even. rip Pirate World
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
I already had Inverse World, which I love, but Grim World really left me cold. Having Death Moves for the IW playbooks is pretty cool I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
So I'm running Dungeon World for the first time on Friday to try it out, and I'm at the point where I need to decide which playbooks I should bring along for people to choose from. I'll be running for a group of about 4 to 5 people, but I don't want to bring along every possible playbook, both so I don't overwhelm everyone and also so that I don't offer people any duds. I have the core book and Inverse World, and I'm willing to look up other recommended playbooks, including non-free ones. Does anyone have advice on particularly well-made playbooks, or which ones from the core book (or elsewhere) to perhaps avoid?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 09:05
|
|
|
I'd avoid the Fighter from the core book on account of it being just worse than the Paladin. Though if people really really want a Fighter, let 'em have it I guess. Just warn them that it'll be on them to make it interesting. Or get the Improved Fighter from the OP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 09:15
|
|
|
Daphnaie posted:So I'm running Dungeon World for the first time on Friday to try it out, and I'm at the point where I need to decide which playbooks I should bring along for people to choose from. I'll be running for a group of about 4 to 5 people, but I don't want to bring along every possible playbook, both so I don't overwhelm everyone and also so that I don't offer people any duds. I have the core book and Inverse World, and I'm willing to look up other recommended playbooks, including non-free ones. Paladin is one to avoid. Most moves you get are boring +1s and you become an armored combat monster (stepping on the Fighter) If someone really wants Paladin then remove fighter, but having both can drag. You're probably fine sticking to core+IW classes. The IW captain is another iffy one, not because it's bad, but because it's strongly focused around the Captain's ship, which means if you are spending a lot of time dungeon diving, it leaves the Captain unable to use a lot of their class moves. The Collecter and Wizard have a bit of overlap to watch for if both get picked and the golem is another combat monster, but sufficiently unique to be able to co-exist with either fighter or paladin A 3rd party playbook to look at would be the Assassin or one of the Thief rewrites. Core Thief isn't bad, but it focuses pretty heavily on poisons which may not appeal to someone just wanting to play a thief or stealthy combatant. Also: the basic Bonds are generally useless. Encourage your players to look at them as a guide and make up their own.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 09:19
|
|
|
On a similar note, I've been putting together a set of playbooks with idea of using them as a "DW 2.0" when I can get a RL group together. I'd be curious as to what people think. The Barbarian The Dashing Hero The Bard The City Thief The Peerless Fighter The Witch The Dwarf The Elf The Halfling The Orc Ideally I'd like to go through them and update the alignment and race moves to drives and backgrounds, but that's where I'm at. I was aiming for a more swords-and-sorcery feel, hence the reduced magic and no super fiddly playbooks, and also threw the Race as Class books in because I really like them. This is, of course, heavily biased by what I think is cool, which no doubt doesn't match up with others' visions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
If you bring homebrew or IW books, don't bring any core ones, and vice versa, because they're starkly different and will stick out like sore thumbs in the wrong type of game. To determine which kind of game it is think about a) how you pitched the game b) the people you're playing with and c) what you like, and what you've prepared and. If you pitched school D&D or 5e with resource management and dying all the time, to newer players slash ones more familiar with and nostalgic for old , the more you want to lean towards core, because they're easy to play for those new players and definitely scratch that nostalgia itch. If they're more into IW superhero games and more complex prestige class, paragon/epic level 3-4e they are, the more you want to stay out of cramped dungeons and let them fly around or be able to taunt monsters with the homebrew and IW classes. I can't really speak to that type of game so I'll say my piece about old school. When it comes down to it, the core classes are perfect for old school D&D players looking to see what these newfangled storygames are about, or just want to relive those days, or storygamers who want to play a silly game of D&D. The quick and dirty answer for what to bring is if you have 4 or fewer players is keep the Fighter, Thief, Cleric, and Wizard, because they're the stereotypical party. If you're running a oneshot or know the campaign will be short, time is precious, definitely don't bring any 3rd party classes, even ones made for Dungeon World ("Improved [Class]), and ditch the Druid, Ranger, maybe Paladin and definitely the Barbarian. (Also make leveling faster, old school players love progression). If you're running a longer one, you can bring "Improved [Class]" books if that's all you bring. If you want reasons for the class restrictions: 3rd party: leveling up takes longer for homebrews because their advanced moves have more complex triggers and bonuses, tend to introduce more mechanics, and the core books have simple bonuses to preexisting, usually basic moves, and 3rd party books tend to be more powerful than the core classes, and there aren't enough of them to cover all the basic classes, especially ones without freeform spellcasting, which will be too broad a mechanic, take too long to adjudicate, and are too much storygame and power for old school or new players. Druid: Wildshape makes the first take the longest turns because you have to generate moves for them, and is more likely to jump the rails and make you have to pause the game to figure out how to deal with that because animals can do things people can't. Ranger and maybe Paladin: the former takes the longest to generate because of the Animal Companion and their moves probably won't come into play enough, the Paladin probably won't get to change their Quest and it might take a while to figure out if your pitch had a less specific plot, meaning "Let's play some old school D&D" vs. describing the campaign or module or setting. Finally, the Barbarian has a racial move that makes them start every session with "blah blah my people, my character" which will probably take time and mess up your pacing, and they get the first XP, for that, which will piss off old school D&D lovers who are a little competitive about that kind of stuff. Bonds: You can tell them to make their own special bonds, but that will likely make character generation take longer, telegraph fewer obvious story hooks to make your job easier, and might make people attached to their or one another's characters. The core are totally fine, they evoke the "feel" of playing an old school game in your youth with super stereotypical, disposable characters, with stereotypical personal sidequests. The Fighter one about making someone "hard like me" in particular is always good for getting people in that juvenile mood. Same thing with Alignments vs drives. Alignments evoke the "feel" of "I remember these drat things: everyone 'needed' to follow them to get 'roleplaying' XP to level as fast as possible, but they usually just got them killed." If you try to import drives it won't work, they are more about giving nuance to the character and propelling them towards growth and personal goals in a longer, broader campaign, they tend not to get those characters killed either. Finally, if you're using the SRD, note that the Arcane Duelist is not core. Its for a more 3.5, prestige class kind of game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
slydingdoor posted:If you bring homebrew or IW books, don't bring any core ones, and vice versa, because they're starkly different and will stick out like sore thumbs in the wrong type of game. I lament this fact. There really ought to be some homebrew classes that are around the same mechanical depth and power level as the core classes. I recently ran into this problem as I took on a new player. A couple of days before his first session I was looking for potential character sheets to hand him. Since we already had a Paladin in the group, I dropped the core Fighter and core Cleric from the list. Wizard was right out as this guy was brand new and I didn't want to dump that level of complexity on him. That meant the only core classes I could give him were Bard and Barbarian. I wanted to provide some more options so I downloaded a bunch of homebrews that are recommended in the OP. After looking through them, I quickly realized that they would contrast starkly with what we already had in the game. I made an effort to weed out the most overpowered ones (gnome7's Mages for instance), but it still left me a bit worried. I believe I was left with: Bard, Barbarian, Dashing Hero, Witch, Artificer, Psion, Warlock. I resigned myself to fate and plopped the stack of blank character sheets in front of the guy. He took a glance at every sheet, sorted a page to the front and wrote his character name at the top. It was the Bard. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
Dashing Hero, City Thief, Initiate and Artificer are honestly the only third-party playbooks that I think fit right in with the 'core D&D' aesthetic in both theme and power level. Honourable mentions to Brute, Spellslinger, Assassin, Gladiator and Slayer for nearly being there. They're really good playbooks, they just don't quite fit with the core classes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
I disagree with the above, I feel like core and third party are completely fine together. but if you do feel the need to make a choice between a core class and the third party ones. I would ditch the core classes. All the core classes have problems like boring advanced moves, being one trick ponies, or invalidating other party members or a lack of focus on themes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Doodmons posted:Dashing Hero, City Thief, Initiate and Artificer are honestly the only third-party playbooks that I think fit right in with the 'core D&D' aesthetic in both theme and power level. Honourable mentions to Brute, Spellslinger, Assassin, Gladiator and Slayer for nearly being there. They're really good playbooks, they just don't quite fit with the core classes. Hmm thanks, I'll keep those in mind. Couldn't really use City Thief as we already have a Thief (incidentally with a city boy backstory), and Assassin is probably in the same niche as well, judging from the name. Error 404 posted:I disagree with the above, I feel like core and third party are completely fine together. I started the game with the core classes as it was my first time DM'ing, and 3 out of 4 players had WoW as their only RPG experience (no P&P whatsoever). I stuck to core as I wanted them to be able to pick it up with the least effort possible. Homebrews have significantly more complexity. My players are now all nearly level 4 and I've indeed noticed that the advancements of the core classes are fairly lackluster. Though they seem content with the stuff they get. Our Paladin uses his Charge! move (+1 forward to everyone you lead into battle) at every opportunity he gets and seems content in doing so. Now if I could only get him to remember he can use Lay on Hands...
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
theroachman posted:Hmm thanks, I'll keep those in mind. Couldn't really use City Thief as we already have a Thief (incidentally with a city boy backstory), and Assassin is probably in the same niche as well, judging from the name. Yeah, if you all are having fun that's the important part over anything else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
theroachman posted:My players are now all nearly level 4 and I've indeed noticed that the advancements of the core classes are fairly lackluster. Though they seem content with the stuff they get. Our Paladin uses his Charge! move (+1 forward to everyone you lead into battle) at every opportunity he gets and seems content in doing so. Now if I could only get him to remember he can use Lay on Hands... For your Paladin, HP can be healed by items and the Bard with less risk, so start doling out diseases that he would be motivated to cure. These are easy because they could have "been incubating" the whole time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
I have to partially agree with the advice to only do core or non-core. I'm rather fond of just Inverse World classes myself. I'd say the best suggestion is to not take anything that steps on the toes of something else you bring. So, even if you have core classes, don't give the option of the Fighter and the Peerless Fighter. Don't give the option of Paladin and Templar. Choose which in that sort of archetype feels better and only offer that one. I'm not sure whether to say you shouldn't have more than one of the various Mage options out there because I'd love to see a game that's nothing but all of those Mages (Time Mage, Dragon Mage, etc). And they're kind of interesting in their own way even while still being "magic guy."
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
I think the Frost/Ice Mage playbook is very well put together.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
RSIxidor posted:I'm not sure whether to say you shouldn't have more than one of the various Mage options out there because I'd love to see a game that's nothing but all of those Mages (Time Mage, Dragon Mage, etc). Super Sentai Mages would be dope.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
RSIxidor posted:I have to partially agree with the advice to only do core or non-core. I'm rather fond of just Inverse World classes myself. Please don't play the Time Mage. Every game I've seen it in, it's done nothing but slow down play by a bunch. Dragon Mage is hella cool, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
Daphnaie posted:So I'm running Dungeon World for the first time on Friday to try it out, and I'm at the point where I need to decide which playbooks I should bring along for people to choose from. I'll be running for a group of about 4 to 5 people, but I don't want to bring along every possible playbook, both so I don't overwhelm everyone and also so that I don't offer people any duds. I have the core book and Inverse World, and I'm willing to look up other recommended playbooks, including non-free ones. I'm a little late to the party, but I'll also suggest The Gallant by Androc and I. It's been highly reviewed in both games I've personally seen it played in, and it avoids pretty much all of the issues that the Paladin has (it has only 2~3 moves with numerical bonuses instead of 8, for example).
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
djw175 posted:Please don't play the Time Mage. Every game I've seen it in, it's done nothing but slow down play by a bunch. Dragon Mage is hella cool, though. Time Mage is fantastic as long as the player is quick and decisive. Unfortunately, that doesn't describe many gamers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Yeah, the Dragon Mage is basically an "Improved Immolator" in terms of power. If you're playing a core game and wish you could be a Dragon Mage, play an Immolator. Also the Dragon Mage's goofy midas touch move is actually really annoying when the player wants to turn every trash monsters' daggers clubs and spears into a pittance of gold during Make Camp. Normally the game has load and encumbrance rules to penalize PC's for being hoarder-competionists. RSIxidor posted:I'm not sure whether to say you shouldn't have more than one of the various Mage options out there because I'd love to see a game that's nothing but all of those Mages (Time Mage, Dragon Mage, etc). And they're kind of interesting in their own way even while still being "magic guy." NinjaDebugger posted:Time Mage is fantastic as long as the player is quick and decisive. Unfortunately, that doesn't describe many gamers. I had to make a lot of adjudications where they were competing for the spotlight without giving the appearance of favoritism, inconsistency, or arbitrariness. As is normal, we got tripped up a few times figuring out what was really under aligned with their focus and opposed school. When they leveled up both took Prodigy and got another pair--forget about it. That's before they even finished describing their spells. Once they got to rolling dice, the players quickly figured out that "it won't last long" is the weakest penalty because the I couldn't just invalidate the spell, I had to give the them a chance to take advantage of it. We also found out if they didn't just spam that drawback I had to stop and think after every spell they cast because it was difficult for me to keep coming up with 3 ways the spell could go wrong while they described it and then throw away one or two or all of them. They noticed it was taxing me and just said "hey, we'll only ever pick 'much more or much less' or 'unforeseen side effects,' and on a 7-9, 'both' or 'one' and '-1 ongoing.'" That made the game a little easier in terms of not having to slow the game down thinking of answers, but it was still annoying me to have to either think of two, wait for the dice, and then throw away one or both. During a break, I had another drink and decided it'd be way easier when I just used the old rules: "draw unwanted attention" or "put them in a spot." That let me really easily think of those two consequences for the 7-9 while they described their spells, and be ready to go with it after they were finished rolling. That ease was probably somewhat a function of my greater familiarity with the core rules, but I had run games with one Mage before that weren't nearly as hard. I think its being easier to protect all the classes' niches had something to do with it. Coming up with things that challenged the Mage but not everyone else and vice versa, without stepping on anyone's toes was easier to keep in balance than two Mages with two broad rear end abilities. Also the Mage players when there was only one always picked the Mask focus, which had the strictest opposed elements, and so forced them to be incredibly clever. They basically could not cast a spell that revealed that they could cast spells, or anything that arrgh just hit someone. Even when their enemies knew they could cast spells. Still, the other players did get tired of how long the Mage's turns took, describing a spell was somewhat like making a wish, had stipulations and strict descriptions in order to get the bonus to the roll. I could feel the eyes rolling when I reminded the player of the limitations of what was Aligned with his Focus and Opposed, because then he would have to clarify and backpedal. In terms of figuring out what happened after the roll, it was an older version of the Mage that had "pick two or the GM picks one," they suggested I always just pick one and we went from there. I never picked "won't last long." In the end, people enjoyed one- and two-Mage games, but I wouldn't run one again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
Time Travel is a one-protagonist ability, not a team power. That's why every timetraveler in comics is either evil or assemblies superteams to do their biding. If you want to cut complexity, drop the Wizard and Cleric; spell lists are complicated. It's perfectly fine if you bring 7 sheets to a 4 player con game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
slydingdoor posted:You should get together with the bored players and all make some moves. Be sure to follow the Advanced Delving rules, a lot of people forget them. Since the core classes are so simple and defined, it's easy to be familiar enough with them to keep all their niches safe and still get creative by using as a guide your players' specific characters and the specific Dungeon World that you all created. I don't think I have any bored players, yet. But I wouldn't have thought of making our own moves once they do get bored, good tip! The group doesn't have any healing items yet, but they will soon (temporarily, the McGuffin they're after has healing powers, but they'll probably hand it off as soon as they get it). I've already given some of them a disease once (Weak from eating bad berries), but the Paladin didn't pick up on it. They're currently in a swampy mushroom forest, who knows what terrible affliction they'll catch there...
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
theroachman posted:They're currently in a swampy mushroom forest, who knows what terrible affliction they'll catch there... This is a dickish move, but take away their stuff is a gm move. How about Goldrot? A fungus that literally starts eating their gold. Like maybe 1 or 2, but if left untreated it could get way worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
dank-rear end mushroom forest is the perfect time to bust out some hallucinogens When I did some minor sanity/confusing/drug stuff in one of my games, a tactic I used that seemed to be well received is to constantly mention weird or off-base stuff and never ever repeat yourself the same way. For example, party got gassed by a zealot who was hopped up on so many drugs he exploded when they lit him on fire. Until they managed to climb their way out of the cult base and reach daylight and fresh air I tried to make it seem like they were consantly being followed by mentioning figures moving in the shadows but giving them replies like "there's nothing there" or "your head hurts" when they try to investigate them. They would turn down a hallway and I would tell them they were being beset by giant flaming bats, and when they reacted, I would tell them that the wolf they had just slain turned to ash before scattering to the (non-existent) wind. If I was ever asked to repeat or clarify something, I would disregard what I was just talking about and make up something new.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Babe Magnet, that is a magnificent idea. I'm taking it! Error 404 posted:This is a dickish move, but take away their stuff is a gm move. There's nothing dickish about it if it's the result of a failed roll and it fits the fiction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
RSIxidor posted:I'm not sure whether to say you shouldn't have more than one of the various Mage options out there because I'd love to see a game that's nothing but all of those Mages (Time Mage, Dragon Mage, etc). And they're kind of interesting in their own way even while still being "magic guy." I kind of want to run this now. A party of Winter Mage, Clock Mage, Dragon Mage, Masked Mage, and Star Mage in a wizard school having wizard adventures.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
I ran a Hogwarts game once with a Psion, Necromancer, Dragon Mage, Spellslinger and Witch. It was fun because all of those playbooks have very different and fairly narrow interpretations of what their "magic" is, so everyone got to be wizards but still have niche protection. Running an all Mage game just sounds like a headache.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
Doodmons posted:I ran a Hogwarts game once with a Psion, Necromancer, Dragon Mage, Spellslinger and Witch. It was fun because all of those playbooks have very different and fairly narrow interpretations of what their "magic" is, so everyone got to be wizards but still have niche protection. This is a great idea. I might have to pull this together with some of my Potter-loving buddies. Doodmons posted:... Running an all Mage game just sounds like a headache. Yeah, while fun for an experienced player who plans ahead, they're certainly not an all-audiences thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
So I was thinking about Dark Souls and Dungeon World today. I ended up making this thing. Hopefully someone is amused by it, even if it isn't, you know, good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 12:09
|
|
|
thefakenews posted:So I was thinking about Dark Souls and Dungeon World today. I ended up making this thing. Hopefully someone is amused by it, even if it isn't, you know, good. Dang man, I actually really really like this. Especially the trio of Hack & Slash moves. I think some of them could use a little tweaking but overall this is something I would use in a heartbeat. Some of it is more wording and trying to make the moves evoke what's happening more. The one that stood out to me was Fight Defensively, which is usually a core fighting style but usually the point as I saw it being successfully didn't just mean doing your damage but also hoping they would deflect and be wide open. Also resource management wise it may be a bit much to pay Stamina for both effects even on a 10. Taking all this together I feel like this might be an improvement. Also now that I write this out I was very focused on the shield aspect, which may be something different. Either way, I think this works: Fight Defensively When you try to avoid harm by utilizing your shield, spend a stamina and roll+CON. On a 10+ pick two, on a 7-9 pick one: -Absorb the blow, negating their damage -Retaliate as they recover, dealing your damage -Their blow deflects and opens them up completely for a moment Same sort of idea for the dodging one, I feel like for moves like this it should be spending stamina just to use the move at all and then the roll determines the effects with some sort of "pick x from x+1".
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Bear Enthusiast posted:Also now that I write this out I was very focused on the shield aspect, which may be something different. Either way, I think this works: I think your version is a definite improvement. Evasive Fighting When you use your speed and reflexes to try and avoid an attack, Spend 1 Stamina: roll+Dex On a 10+ pick two, on a 7-9 pick one: - You avoid the attack, taking no damage - You find an opening in their defense, deal your damage - You use the engagement area to your advantage, seize the higher ground or an advantageous position I think I would probably drop the Stamina loss on the 7-9 result on All Out Attack and make it a Spend for that move too: All Out Attack When you attack your foe without care for defence, Spend 1 Stamina: roll+STR. On a hit deal you damage, and your enemy makes an attack against you. On a 10+ choose two, on a 7-9 choose one: - Deal an additional 1d6 damage - Take +1 forward when you next act against the target - Take definite hold of something important or valuable
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
I'd probably just call it "Evasion"; does it apply to avoiding traps and the like as well? (Barrels down the stairs, giant swinging logs or blades like in Sens, etc) --- On a side note, my game I've modified Spout Lore to let the players make up more of the world, since I've got a creative bunch and I find it more fun that way. To put it basically, I ask "what do you think you know already?" and we see how right or wrong they are. I'm pretty sure I stole this from somewhere else but I can't for the life of me remember where. Does anyone have any suggestions for the 10+/7-9/6- wording (for my use mainly)? I'm hewing broadly to "Yes, yes but, and nope" but if there's an elegant way to do it I'm all ears.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
Jintor posted:I'd probably just call it "Evasion"; does it apply to avoiding traps and the like as well? (Barrels down the stairs, giant swinging logs or blades like in Sens, etc) I figure that Defy Danger covers that stuff pretty well. A Stamina cost could be added to Defy Danger in combat I guess (since Stamina doesn't really matter outside of combat). Alternatively, "Make them lose Stamina" could be added to the GM moves.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
Do you expect Souls World to be a 1 player/ 1 GM arrangement like Dark Souls or would this be a team effort like normal Dungeon World? Because, if the later, the bonfire thing could get weird. Though, split screening is common in DW so it might not be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 11:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:50 |
|
|
Covok posted:Do you expect Souls World to be a 1 player/ 1 GM arrangement like Dark Souls or would this be a team effort like normal Dungeon World? Because, if the later, the bonfire thing could get weird. Though, split screening is common in DW so it might not be a problem. Honestly, it was basically a thought experiment around trying to make DW moves that capture some of the mechanics of Dark Souls, so the bonfire and NPC stuff was included more as a nod to the games than because I think they would be great in play. I think if there was more than one player the bonfire stuff could work out pretty messily. It might work out as a one on one thing, but I'm not into that sort of play so I doubt I'll ever test it. I think maybe there's something interesting in the stamina/combat moves if I think a little deeper though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 14:08
|
|