Hacking. I’ve read in two places now: start with the GM agenda, principles and moves. This seems daunting!
The AW MC section is huge, and it strikes me almost as a general treatise on GMing (e.g. “say what honesty demands”) broken into granules. Writing my own equivalent or adaptation as a starting point strikes me as .. unlikely.
On the other hand, when I read the Dark Hart DW supplement (so good), I’m inspired – it has a laser focus on genre-specific differences (e.g. “give everything personhood”), ignoring general GMing advice completely.
This seems eminently manageable.
(As another random data point, I notice that The Regiment breezes through this with a bulleted list.)
I may be answering my own question, but I’d love to hear from others.
You are answering your own question, but that’s cool. Starting with the MC agenda and principles is a great place to start, and as you can see, each game will have it’s own tweak on the concept.
I heard that first straight up from J. Walton and it re-forged everything about how i was approaching my own hacks.
Why do i consider it beneficial?
In a nutshell, because it uprooted the lust to just write cool moves and come up with cool playbooks. It put that all aside long enough for me to really, intentionally, wisely figure out what my game is about. Now that i’ve got a handful of hacks to look at, the ones that started with PBs and Moves are in dire need of full overhaul. The one’s that started out asking “What’s my agenda here, as the Master of Ceremonies? What are the points of light i’m aiming for?”
Even if it’s not a solid-gold, for-certain solutions, it’s a really, really great way to re-think your game. It’s a super cool approach.
Start wherever you can get the most words on the screen. Start where you feel comfortable. Start where the hack demands. Start.
Yeah, that laser focus on what is my game about is dead on.
I may have read the same things you did Michael Prescott . It does seem daunting, but I do think deciding on the three MC Agendas is a good place to start. They should capture the tone and feel of the hack you’re making, and so referring back tho those while developing the other stuff (MC moves, playbooks, etc.) will help keep you on track.
You don’t have to write ALL the GM stuff again, just the stuff that’s different from other AW-based games. Steal liberally from the hard work of others. That’s what I did in Dark Heart.
Everybody is saying what I would say to back up the point. If you don’t actually know what your game is about, you will learn it damn fast by making new Agenda / Principle / Move sets.
Also, for the love of Yeezus, write a small hack (the size of a Sundered Land game) or a short single-playbook hack (Ghost Lines, World of Dungeons) before attempting a massive multi-playbook thing like DW or even something the size of Dark Heart. You’ll learn a lot and, best of all, you can write it and play it really quickly! You could write and play it in the same weekend! Anything that gets you playing the game faster (that’s what really matters!!!) is better, IMO. Honestly, Dark Heart would have been easier to write if I’d done in on the Sundered Land / Ghost Lines model first, played it a bunch, and then expanded it.
J. Walton Tha’ts basically the route I’m taking (Nanoworld
–> Lapins & Lairs–> The Warren). Good advice!(It’s also easier to get feedback on a 6-page hack that is the core of your game than on a full sized rules text)
Guess I should take that advice, instead of trying to jump right into Program World, huh? 😉
Always wondered how to hack a *W game. / listening with interest.
If it’s working for you, don’t listen to what me or anyone else has to say 😉
/sub