|
The Glumslinger posted:What do I do if my players never roll discern reality or spout lore? Have them face the full brunt of the traps? Nemesis Of Moles posted:Moves aren't something that players really get to choose happens, they MUST trigger when the time comes. If they don't spend time trying to find traps, then they trigger them and you can discern for the effects of the trap I suppose. This. If they're looking for traps, then depending on how they're looking they might trigger Discern, Defy Danger, or whatever else. If they're not looking, then the trap hits them. But you don't say "the trap hits you, take 2 damage" or whatever. You say "Oh poo poo, you just stepped on a pressure plate, what do you do?" If they dive out of what they assume is the target area, then Defy Danger. If they say "what's happening?" then Discern Realities. If they start telling you what's happening, (eg "HOLD STILL! I've just stepped on a pressure plate. Looks like a standard Dwarfhammer & Brewbeard Trap-O-Matic 9000 so it's not gonna trigger until I step off. I want you to very carefully..." then I guess Spout Lore. e: You can still do this with traps you've made up and pre-placed, just apply the "draw maps, leave blanks" principle to your traps so if the players decide they have something to contribute then they can. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Mar 17, 2017 |
#
?
Mar 17, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
Yeah, ideally the player says, "I look for traps," and you say, "Cool. Roll +INT" and apply the rules for either discern or defy as appropriate. That's almost always way better than waiting for them to say, "I discern realities to find traps." Remember, if what they're saying sounds like a move, you call for a roll whether they say "I'm doing X move" or not. And for players new to the system, they'll contextualize things in terms of what their characters are doing, not which of a set of unfamiliar moves they're rolling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2017 11:55
|
|
|
I just started a new World of Dungeons game for some guys at my work. Only one of them has any experience with tabletop games and after the first game they LOVED it. I didn't think they'd be interested and gave them an intro game to see if they wanted to bow out. Now they're emailing each other in a big group email during the workday to talk about their characters and stuff. We're all middle school teachers too, so some of the students we share ask us questions about the game. Now every Friday I have kids asking "so did Mr. Smith trigger any traps this week?" It's been really cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2017 13:40
|
|
|
so we had our first session last night, and it went pretty well! I was fumbling a bit with remembering which moves applied when (in particular, i got spout lore and discern realities backwards about 3 or 4 times) but i imagine that will get easier with practice. i did have a few questions, though: - based on one of the 7-9 outcomes for the wizard's Cast a Spell move, am i correct in assuming that a spell that has been prepared can be cast multiple times (assuming it hasn't been forgotten due to said outcome)? - i had a druid shapeshift into a hawk and attempt to grab a skeleton by the eye sockets and rip its head off. besides being  i didn't really know how to handle this move-wise -- my gut was to do a hack and slash roll, but +Str didn't really make sense so i had her roll+Dex. How much detail should i be putting into the moves for the druid's animal form? likewise, is using the character's base damage the right thing to do when they're shapeshifted?- someone chose a (two-handed) staff and a shield that grants +1 armor as their starting equipment. using both at the same time doesn't really make sense to me in the fiction; they did one hack and slash with the staff with a 7-9 outcome and used the armor value of the shield to deduct one from the damage they took. Should i have not allowed them to use both at the same time? - everyone wanted to fill in all the bonds on their character sheets at the very beginning but in the first mini adventure we did the characters were kind of paired off beforehand and the two pairs didn't really know each other prior to meeting outside of a cave. am i within the realm of good GMing to retroactively revoke the bonds between characters that hadn't met before? overall, i think everyone had a great time. i really really like how the system turns underspecification into a strength instead of requiring every detail to be fleshed out beforehand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
- yes. Prepared spells can be cast until the wizard elects to forget them. - shapeshifted Druid moves are probably one of the most difficult class features in all of Dungeon World. That sounds like a standard hack-and-slash to me, but I wouldn't charge the Druid a shapeshift hold just to do a hack-and-slash. Now, if they wanted to attack and then fly away, leaving themselves safe from melee attacks, that sounds more like a hawk-specific move. - like, as part of the same move? Probably not. Keep in mind that mechanical results in DW are supposed to follow the fiction -- if there's no way a shield could fictionally apply to a result, it doesn't. - ummm. I would never deny my players if they wanted to have pre-established relationships, but that's up to you. Bonds should update and resolve quick enough that it shouldn't make a huge difference.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:so we had our first session last night, and it went pretty well! I was fumbling a bit with remembering which moves applied when (in particular, i got spout lore and discern realities backwards about 3 or 4 times) but i imagine that will get easier with practice. i did have a few questions, though: That's how it works, you pick what spells you have ready, and then can keep using them until you trigger the 'lose a spell' consequence. quote:- i had a druid shapeshift into a hawk and attempt to grab a skeleton by the eye sockets and rip its head off. besides being quote:- someone chose a (two-handed) staff and a shield that grants +1 armor as their starting equipment. using both at the same time doesn't really make sense to me in the fiction; they did one hack and slash with the staff with a 7-9 outcome and used the armor value of the shield to deduct one from the damage they took. Should i have not allowed them to use both at the same time? In this instance, I'd let them roll with it. Unless I've missed something the only playbook that gets that combo is the Cleric, and that staff doesn't do anything special aside from be 2 handed. If you're unsure how he uses a shield with a staff, ask him and let him come up with something cool. Or it's a buckler or something. If you're thinking something's strange in the fiction, ask a question about how it works, before saying no. If it was a giant great sword with a damage boost, or a fighter/paladin with crazy Armour already, I'd probably answer differently since that can just lead to some really high numbers. quote:- everyone wanted to fill in all the bonds on their character sheets at the very beginning but in the first mini adventure we did the characters were kind of paired off beforehand and the two pairs didn't really know each other prior to meeting outside of a cave. am i within the realm of good GMing to retroactively revoke the bonds between characters that hadn't met before? I hate to be kinda rude about this but that's really not what you should do. If they've written that stuff on their sheet, they actually Have met before, and that's something you should change your story for, rather than take away player agency. Either change the story a bit (in an instance like this, it doesn't have to be big, just make it a coincidence that they met people they knew) or tell the players "I planned the start, can we tweak the bonds to represent this?" quote:overall, i think everyone had a great time. i really really like how the system turns underspecification into a strength instead of requiring every detail to be fleshed out beforehand. Nice Wrestlepig fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
rumble in the bunghole posted:I hate to be kinda rude about this but that's really not what you should do. If they've written that stuff on their sheet, they actually Have met before, and that's something you should change your story for, rather than take away player agency. Either change the story a bit (in an instance like this, it doesn't have to be big, just make it a coincidence that they met people they knew) or tell the players "I planned the start, can we tweak the bonds to represent this?" not rude at all, that's totally what i need to hear (i'm brand new to this). i think the problem was that i wasn't paying attention to everyone's bonds in the first encounter, which i think would have been the place to fix it (e.g., "you have a bond that says you have a running con with <character x> but you're playing as if you've never met. is that part of the con?"). Maybe in our next session i'll have them flesh out the character relationships more.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:- i had a druid shapeshift into a hawk and attempt to grab a skeleton by the eye sockets and rip its head off. besides being Re: The Druid Definitely check out the Druid FAQ in the first post. usually when they shape-shift they have a definite "I want this" in mind, so I whip out an index card and go "OK, give me that animal move." Then I treat it like a Spout Lore: Add 1 useful move, and Add 1 interesting move. So for Hawk, I'd give them "Snatch & Run" for stealing the skull, "Keen Eyesight" as a useful move, and "Loud Shriek" for an interesting move. And then they spend hold, 1 for 1, to just do that move, no roll required.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
Arashiofordo3 posted:There is also the Elementalist. Which is my fav elemental book. Although it's only possible to get through this campain book. I know this is from a few days ago, but you can get the Elementalist as part of this PWYW deal: http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/129989/Johnstones-Dungeon-World-Character-Classes
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
RedMagus posted:Re: The Druid this is a great way to handle it, thanks. to be clear, in the original scenario the skeleton in question was an undead skeleton that was running toward another party member; it definitely needed to be a combat-oriented move of some sort.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:this is a great way to handle it, thanks. to be clear, in the original scenario the skeleton in question was an undead skeleton that was running toward another party member; it definitely needed to be a combat-oriented move of some sort. Anything else they try to accomplish while shapeshifted should just be a regular player move as appropriate so long as the fiction allows for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Right, but the way the Druid's move is written, shapeshifting only gives them access to a monster's moves, which should be a finite list of things that they can do automatically by spending hold. so, if i'm understanding you correctly, the way this would work out mechanically would be that flying up and swooping down on the skeleton would be the animal move they would spend a hold on, and then ripping the skeleton's head off by the eye sockets would be a regular (either hack and slash or defy danger, i guess) roll?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
I mean the way I always do it is you spend hold to do something only that animal form could do - Flight, charging, stomping around, spitting acid, whatever. If the move has some unique narrative effect that could only have been achieved if the druid was a snake or whatever - that's a Hold spending action. If they could have essentially achieved the same thing in their previous form, in this example knocking a skeletons head off with its staff vs ripping it off via claws, that's probably just hack and slash. Its easier to think of the moves as something that triggers rather than something one consciously does - hack and slash says that it triggers "When you attack an enemy in melee", if what your player does fits that, use hack and slash unless you see good reason not to. RedMagus's approach to the whole thing is rad tho I'm gonna do that. Nemesis Of Moles fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:I know this is from a few days ago, but you can get the Elementalist as part of this PWYW deal: http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/129989/Johnstones-Dungeon-World-Character-Classes I think I'd recommend The Channeler over The Elementalist. The Elementalist seems overly detailed in having to keep track of all the commands, but weirdly vague as to how you actually do stuff with it. To me it looks like a simple "I throw a fireball" needs both the Create and Move commands, plus the advanced move to make it actually do a sensible amount of damage. I much prefer The Channeler's approach of choosing a pair of tags that describe the effects of the spell. It also gives you a basic move that's explicitly "you can do minor cool poo poo with your element", something that I don't think needs the level of detail The Elementalist has. My Witch player got a bit tired of just shooting spells at people, so I let her change to The Channeler - there was a 6 month gap between campaign chapters where she turned into a swan and went on a spirit quest to the south pole, and traded away her eye for mystical knowledge. So now she has an elemental portal under her eyepatch. I was expecting her to shoot ice beams or fire balls. Instead, she graphically described how she slowly and painfully pulled a giant spear of ice out of her eye socket and stabbed a dude with it  She also set her broom stick on fire and hurled it into shark infested waters. My players are not good at thinking ahead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Nemesis Of Moles posted:Its easier to think of the moves as something that triggers rather than something one consciously does - hack and slash says that it triggers "When you attack an enemy in melee", if what your player does fits that, use hack and slash unless you see good reason not to. yeah, i had a hard time with this (both with myself and my players) -- i found myself saying "OK, but what do you do?" a lot. From what i've been reading, it sounds like this is pretty common, so i'm not super worried about it yet. I'm hoping that as we get more familiar with the game it'll be easier for everyone to think in terms of the fiction instead of the rules.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:yeah, i had a hard time with this (both with myself and my players) -- i found myself saying "OK, but what do you do?" a lot. From what i've been reading, it sounds like this is pretty common, so i'm not super worried about it yet. I'm hoping that as we get more familiar with the game it'll be easier for everyone to think in terms of the fiction instead of the rules. "What do you do" is kind of the tagline for the whole game so I'd say you're on the right track. I think everyone has struggled with this at some point in running DW, there's always a player or two that wants to "Hack and Slash" or "Discern Realities" or whatever and breaking that habit is 90% of being a DW GM in my experience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
No. If swoop and snatch is a move for that animal, they get to spend hold to just do it. So long as you deem it to be something situationally appropriate for a hawk to snatch, no roll is required. Similarly, if you shapeshift into a rhinoceros and one of the rhino moves is trample, gore, and smash, if the player says they want to make that move against their skeleton foe and spends a hold, then you have one trampled, gored, smashed skeleton. Is it fictionally appropriate that getting trampled by a rhino destroys a skeleton? Yeah, I'd say so. So that skeleton is destroyed and you don't need to make a hack-and-slash roll at all. Easy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Well, to be fair, I wouldn't call it easy. As was mentioned earlier, the druid is definitely one of the mechanical low points in the game. Players shouldn't be using GM moves because GM moves are just shorthand for "how to run a good game". The text of the Shapeshift move leaves a lot of room for interpretation, and it's clunky no matter what. So really, however you decide it works is fine as long as it works you you and the group. I like the predefined list (with input from the player) because leaving it totally open-ended ends up being pretty powerful in a game that relies so heavily on the fiction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Well, to be fair, I wouldn't call it easy. As was mentioned earlier, the druid is definitely one of the mechanical low points in the game. Players shouldn't be using GM moves because GM moves are just shorthand for "how to run a good game". Why do you keep calling them GM moves? There's no connection between shapeshifted/animal moves and GM moves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Also, if you don't let the player make an "animal move" and just default to hack & slash, your player is still rolling +STR as normal - but shapeshift doesn't change your stats, so your bear is no more terrifying in combat than the druid himself was, which defeats one of the main purposes of shapeshifting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
admanb posted:Why do you keep calling them GM moves? There's no connection between shapeshifted/animal moves and GM moves. So assuming you allow them to Shapeshift into a warg, their move list could be: -Carry a rider into battle -Give its rider an advantage And since one of the actual GM moves is "Use a monster, danger, or location move" you're effectively giving them GM moves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Ilor posted:No. If swoop and snatch is a move for that animal, they get to spend hold to just do it. So long as you deem it to be something situationally appropriate for a hawk to snatch, no roll is required. Similarly, if you shapeshift into a rhinoceros and one of the rhino moves is trample, gore, and smash, if the player says they want to make that move against their skeleton foe and spends a hold, then you have one trampled, gored, smashed skeleton. Is it fictionally appropriate that getting trampled by a rhino destroys a skeleton? Yeah, I'd say so. So that skeleton is destroyed and you don't need to make a hack-and-slash roll at all. Easy. this makes sense to me, but it sounds massively OP - do i let the druid turn into a bear and claw the poo poo out of every enemy they encounter? do i use failed rolls of the Shapeshifter move to limit this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:this makes sense to me, but it sounds massively OP - do i let the druid turn into a bear and claw the poo poo out of every enemy they encounter? do i use failed rolls of the Shapeshifter move to limit this? You come up with something that would beat a bear and use it against the bear - a beartrap, a sinkhole, tight quarters, an ogre, etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Or perhaps a pot of honey or a picnic basket.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Poops Mcgoots posted:Or perhaps a pot of honey or a picnic basket. forget everything i said do this
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:this makes sense to me, but it sounds massively OP - do i let the druid turn into a bear and claw the poo poo out of every enemy they encounter? do i use failed rolls of the Shapeshifter move to limit this? Failures on the shapeshift move are another factor, and in that case it's nice to turn these moves back on them. So you shapeshift into a bear such that you can use berserk rampage or whatever, but you fail the roll - at which point the GM tells you, yeah, sure, you turn into a bear and start rampaging - but your base-instinct bear brain gets a little fuzzy on what constitutes "friend" versus "foe" and you end up mauling your cleric. Shapeshift failures are comedy gold, BTW.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Ilor posted:You use the amount of hold of the shapeshift move to limit it. If you only have one hold, you can only trample, gore, and crush one enemy - unless you've decided that this move has the "messy" tag, in which case maybe you can mess up a couple of enemies at once. Once the player has spent their hold, they revert to their natural form (i.e. the spell has expired). this is awesome and i love it. going back to my question, though -- what stops the druid from doing another shapeshift at their next opportunity? fortunately, i think most of this is going to end up being theoretical; my druid seems to have the right attitude about how to play the game and i don't think she's going to be tempted to abuse the move.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:this is awesome and i love it. going back to my question, though -- what stops the druid from doing another shapeshift at their next opportunity?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:this is awesome and i love it. going back to my question, though -- what stops the druid from doing another shapeshift at their next opportunity?  But ImpactVector makes the key point, and that's that it takes some (unspecific) amount of time to shapeshift. That is the druid's action for that tick. So when the druid says, "I want to shapeshift," you say, "Cool" and have them roll and generate hold. But make them wait until it's their turn again to use one of those holds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:this is awesome and i love it. going back to my question, though -- what stops the druid from doing another shapeshift at their next opportunity? This is echoing what others have said, but sometimes shape shifting is a bad idea—or at least a risky one. As an example: You say "The two goblins on the other side of the room aim their short bows at you, and loose. You have two arrows coming at you. Why do you do?" If your player's response is "I turn into a bear", then you can say "Cool, you take damage from the two arrows. Now roll to shapeshift". Basically, circumstances often force you to engage with other things in the fiction. Similarly to the example above, if the Druid was getting attacked in melee and declared a shapeshift, then you can bet they are taking damage (or having a hand bitten off if it's a ghoul) because they are shapeshifting rather than defending themselves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
On the other hand, if those arrows are coming at them and they turn into a mouse, they probably dodged it (assuming they roll well, if not then maybe they were too slow to change).
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
Shapeshift is just a really dumb move in general, DW needs a 2e to fix a bunch of stuff like that
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:On the other hand, if those arrows are coming at them and they turn into a mouse, they probably dodged it (assuming they roll well, if not then maybe they were too slow to change). A neat way to resolve ambiguous situations like that is to prompt the player. "Okay you are shapeshifting and the goblins loose their arrows at the now swirling mass of Druid and animal bits." The druid can no longer directly address the arrows flying and their roll can be what it is for the shapeshift but they are occupied doing that Alone and with a bad roll maybe the arrows could stick in a wing and their bird form can't fly or a really bad roll and the arrows stick in their form and they are stuck as a half shifted thing and have to spend another action to go back but the druid pc is accepting the damage at that point. Maybe another player calls out a defend action to block the arrows or defy danger to tackle the druid away from the arrows or maybe the bars simply plays a sad tune for the passing of Greenleaf while ironically pincushioned during a transformation into a hedgehog Approach the mechanics to create narrative tension and prompt action from players instead of just jumping right to the damage roll but so much that every situation gives the players an easy out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
anyone have opinions on any of the druid rewrites floating around and whether they address this satisfactorily?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
last time I ran a druid I ran his domain as "History/War" and instead of transforming into different animals my dude would take on the ghostly armaments and style of a famous historical warrior of the setting for one crucial moment
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
I want to say I was playing a druid reskinned into a Viera Geomancer for our FF game we played a long while back. And I remember I failed EVERY.drat.ROLL. Ask spirits to take out the empires ships on the coast ended up with a tidal wave where we had to retreat to higher ground bringing the ships, and all the enemies closer to the island village we were trying to protect. Man I really need to get my buds to pick this up again. It was so much fun. I want to say I reskinned the shapeshift ability to elemental manipulation, using hold to do some neat things with the different elements. But like I said I failed every roll that game so things went terribly every time.
cancerianmoth fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Berkshire Hunts posted:anyone have opinions on any of the druid rewrites floating around and whether they address this satisfactorily? The only dumb thing about the druid is the Shapeshift move, the rest of the class is really neat. It doesn't get all numbersy and gets cool magic options without vancian spellcasting. I don't know if it's worth the hassle of sorting out improved classes or whatever. There really needs to be a Dungeon World 2e, there's a lot of stuff that needs a fix over what's a really cool game otherwise. Wrestlepig fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
I super don't get the hate for Shapeshift here. Every time I've run a Druid it's panned out with no problem at all. Players understood the move, it was fast and fun to adjudicate, good times all round.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 12:33
|
|
|
What else would people want to see out of a 2e? One-stat Defy Danger seems to be a very common request. A rework to ability scores would be nice too, six seems like too many and needing both a score and a modifier feels sort of archaic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 12:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
Honestly, I question the need for Dungeon World at all. I've had no problems running Apocalypse World reskinned for a medieval fantasy setting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 15:22
|
|