Hey, took my first attempt at writing a playbook. It’s not formatted in tr-fold, but let me know what you guys think cause this is a first draft. If people think it has merit, I’ll make edits, maybe even see about prettying it up and re release it.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B511-yaR3CdxeUtPbnhGNUpsZjQ/edit
Overall, I really like it. I think some of the moves need tweaking because they’re pretty straightforward with an NPC, but with a PC you have to deal with the other player’s options. I will sit down with this later tonight and crank out some more concrete thoughts on this…
I didn’t notice it before but the Stats seem all over the place, they don’t balance out evenly, and there is no single specialization stat. All of that seems off.
I like the Quarry + Clue mechanics. That is really neat.
I would call Posse something else, make it more flavorful, like “Roundin’ ’em up” or “My Fellow Victims” but that’s just me.
Pin Them Down seems like it should be Hard, and it needs a caveat for using it against a PC. Like, on 10+ a player who attempts to do anything other than stay where they are and take cover is acting under fire. On a 7-9, they are acting under fire if they try to leave but can still fight.
Re-write Interrogator (I would call it “Interrogation Technique”, again that’s just me): when you go aggro on somebody who is at your mercy, either through captivity or surrender, it is as if you’d rolled a 10+.
I think the moves that add to open your brain and read a person are great!
Special: I would make this something the MC imparts. The MC simply tells you when that character last saw or interacted with your quarry, if at all, and you both take Hx+1 with each other. (simple is better) The part with the hold 1 doesn’t need to be changed in my opinion, I think that’s great.
Finally, I love the gear choices. Good job!
Willow Palecek might have good advice to add to this. She usually spots things that I don’t, and her opinion is always more valuable than mine.
How do the clues interact with the Marmont Moves that give you +clues?
Is there any way to get extra clues besides from the advancement?
I’m with Patrick Henry Downs on the Stat blocks.
‘books normaly have a high stat that is even on all of the statblocks. (Chopper hard, driver sharp, battlebabe cool etc.)
Giving out a +3 Cool just like that is overpowered. The Battlebabe get’s +3 cool at the start basically as an invisible Move.
It also combines to +4 while all other statblocks in the game (besides Drive, Battlebabe and 1 Operator Statblock) even out at +3
Just saw that you can get +3 in all of the statblocks (besides the last one)
Also giving you one really high stat “forces” you to take the coresponding move. Interrogator for hard, Posse for Hot etc.
I really like “The little things” but Interrogator makes go Aggro really really powerfull. I would go with Patricks suggestion of sometimes treating it as a 10+.
I like the part in interrogation where the vic can’t choose to “suck it up” but only for an NPC. Perhaps with a PC you treat it as a 10+ like Patrick suggested. Or when going aggro on a PC and “what you want is information) The vic gains 1xp if they choose to give you the answers you want. But a PC should have the choice of sucking it up. I also agree that the stats should not only have a single primary stat at +2 and getting to a + 3 should be via a move. Advancement should take the Hound to +2 at max. For Example the Gunlugger gets Insano Like Draino for Hard +1 (Max +3) None of the advancements allow a +1 to go over a +2 Max. Some stat spreads should give more than one stat at a +2 but the advancements should have max +2 noted. My $0.02 anyhow.
I actually based stats around the battle babe stats. My original thought on the matter was that i wanted to make a book where your powerful on stats but weak on moves because they rely on so many different stats. I also liked the idea that the hound got to chose their good stat because there are many different ways of hunting a person (do you pay close attention, follow psychic hints, or maybe scare the shit out of others). This for stats may not work with AW, but since the game ism’t about balance i thought it could work. I do agree pin down should have a pc option, i initially wrote it as a reverse ‘eye on the door’. I also had concerns with interrogator, but i kinda want to know if the at your mercy clause is enough. It does work out to be an advanced go agro on a 10+ but only if the person’s life is already yours to take, which does take some prior action especially on a pc. As far as the marmot, never read it. Clues only do have the one advancement, but i couldn’t think of what else should go there. After all fortunes cap out at a +2 as well.
Well, the interrogation move as written sounds like it’s an “avoid torture” kind of move. Because if somebody is at your mercy and you either inflict pain or harm in exchange for information, then sucking it up just means that they resist telling you anything. Your move evades that and says, essentially, that they just give up the information. (Maybe I’m reading your intention with the move wrong.) It seems like it would work better as a Manipulate move. A person at your mercy is automatically manipulated, for an NPC it means you just get the info and this works good with PCs too because a 10+ is “give me the information for xp or act under fire”
I actually disagree with he avoid torture. What the move does is avoids harm. The point of torture is that you keep the person alive but create intense pain and discomfort in ways that you don’t accidentally kill the victim. I’m currently thinking that the move should work functionally the same on a PC but that whenever it’s used it should automatically impart Hx (the victim learns just how far your character will go to get what he needs)
Mechanically, the way you’ve written it, the victim is neither tortured or harmed. They simply impart information through successful coercion (threat of harm or torture could be the coercion given the options of going aggro*)
I think the mechanics of the move should allow for differences of methods. Sure, one hound might chose torture, but another might use threats, emotional abuse, or emotional manipulation to break down a person’s resolve. My intention for this ability is to let the PC add the flavor of how they get it done. I guess my two goals for this playbook is two fold, one is to allow multiple methods of obtaining the goal, but also to leave the player with a decision of what to do next after the obvious is done. Sure, depending on the stat block there is an obvious move they should take to be mechanically powerful, but after that move they have to make some non obvious choices. The same as when the PC meets their Quarry. The playbook is meant to build up that chase, but then leave the PC to make the choices of what happens after the climax. What comes next? Do they change playbooks? Are they lost without a purpose? Can the Character retire? Or are they so into chasing that they just find somebody new to find?
When you Go Aggro on someone and they choose to suck it up, you can never kill them. #If you would do more harm than they have room on the countdownclok, reduce the harm by one# (this part needs better wording)
Would this work?
I don’t know, it feels a bit clunky, but I’ll think about it. I do kind of like the simplicity of a move that reduces other’s choices, and it feels right with the flavor. I think the only complaint people have is what happens on a 10+. Personally I’m not sure I have a problem with the power of this effect given that your character can already kill the victim if they wanted to, at least not until I see it in play. I figure you basically have to have the character tied to a chair, or defenseless with a gun pressed right against their head, not the normal give me what I want or I’ll run over and hit you with this bat. In other words, the way I see it is that the victim needs to have already accepted that they are helpless in order for the move to work. Does the concept still seem unbalanced? If not how should I write the power so that requirement is clearer?
Maybe look at the Brainer moves and how they are worded?
good idea. What about the phrase ‘when they are helpless to act against you’
Well when they are helpless and you roll a 7-9 they don’t really have all those options at this place. At this moment i would treat an Go Aggro attempt as a 10+ anyway.
I mean, you have your gun to they skull and suddenly they can Barricade themself in or get the hell out of your way?
I take barricade themselves to be a person who shuts down or goes to their happy place. Until you rattle them there’s no getting through. Putting your hands up and backing away would be like begging pleading apologizing but never really doing what is wanted, just spouting a bunch of crap.
Finding the happy place would be the same as sucking it up would it not?
Only if you still hit the person, which you can still do, they are ties to a chair so it’s not even a roll, it just won’t do much good.
A new move is using an already established move but putting a limitation on it, plus go aggro already has it’s own implications about use. By your own description, the fiction of this move could be applied to Manipulation. When you say “Sure, one hound might chose torture, but another might use threats, emotional abuse, or emotional manipulation to break down a person’s resolve.” I think of all of those as manipulate attempts. The stakes that are being raised are “give me the information or I will torture you / I will kill your pet dog / I’ll reveal you were spying on Keeler.”
Considering the confusion over this, I would uncouple this move from go aggro.and just re-write it as it’s own interrogation move. Something like: “when someone is at your mercy and you attempt to extract information from them, treat it as though you had rolled a 10.” This is generic and open-ended, and allows the player to choose what they’re doing. Keep in mind that read a person is effective with interrogation too because you can ask “Are they telling the truth?”
I don’t know how i’m feeling about this move at this point. I like the idea of a move that limits options of a basic rather than increases, not because i dislike others having options but because it can give more meaning to them. As far as accomplishing similar effects with other moves, sure you can, but to me half the fun of the move is looking for or creating situations to use moves. I guess my goal in this move was to have a hard move that would encourage a hard based hound to get what they need by scaring the shit out of others but to also leave consequences for success and failure. I know there are other ways to accomplish the same but i’m not yet convinced this move fails at this, and i don’t won’t to bail out on it because if it works, it will work while being simple, and that’s cool.
Why not a move that treats a 10+ result for go aggro as an advance when the victim is ‘at your mercy’?
Well it kinda already does that while still having a minor effect on a 7-9
Your description doesn’t concisely state that. Remember, simpler is better and also easier to understand.
I think removing ‘suck it up and take it’ is simpler than having to flip to the advanced fuckery section to look at the go agro advanced move just to find out that it says that the victim has to cave in
Maybe for your group. My group plays with a moves pamphlet that lists the advances for the basic moves. YMMV.