I finally got around to checking out the difference between Wolf 1.1 and Wolf 2.0 and I’m not a fan of Territory. It doesn’t work as a mandatory part of the character. Can it be instead reworked as an optional move, or a move other playbooks could take similiar to how holdings work in Apocalypse World? The way it is written now is forcing added fiction down a player’s throat who might only interested in playing other interpretations of a shape-changing character. In a previous game using 1.1, I played a lone wolf struggling to find his place in the world. Territory was not a concern of his, but companionship was. Eventually, he would find that with the other PCs. His character’s story was some parts fish out of water, and some dealing with his rage, both inherent to his species and stemming from his backstory. The Territory move would of just interfered and intruded in the most unwelcome manner.
I finally got around to checking out the difference between Wolf 1.1 and Wolf 2.0 and I’m not a fan of Territory.
I finally got around to checking out the difference between Wolf 1.1 and Wolf 2.0 and I’m not a fan of Territory.
Sub
Sub
If someone wants to play The Wolf and not have a territory, I don’t see why the MC wouldn’t just let them remove that from the sheet. You would be surprised to see how many Wolves in playtest started themselves off with an area of town they protect, it was a very common theme for us in 1.1. That’s why we added it.
But let’s be realistic; no matter what vision we give the Wolf, someone is going to disagree with it. That’s why MC’s have the power to customize their campaigns with custom moves and Love Letters.
If someone wants to play The Wolf and not have a territory, I don’t see why the MC wouldn’t just let them remove that from the sheet. You would be surprised to see how many Wolves in playtest started themselves off with an area of town they protect, it was a very common theme for us in 1.1. That’s why we added it.
But let’s be realistic; no matter what vision we give the Wolf, someone is going to disagree with it. That’s why MC’s have the power to customize their campaigns with custom moves and Love Letters.
The territory bit works beautifully for my Wolf (even if her cursed dice don’t), I do think that all the playbook start of session moves should follow the same guideline as the new start of session move: if you’re already embroiled deep in the plot: don’t bother unless you have good reason to.
The territory bit works beautifully for my Wolf (even if her cursed dice don’t), I do think that all the playbook start of session moves should follow the same guideline as the new start of session move: if you’re already embroiled deep in the plot: don’t bother unless you have good reason to.
Yes, yes. In addition, we also found that the Wolf could sometimes be a problematic playbook when it gets disconnected from the rest of the group. Wolves have very few Debts, and tend to acquire fewer Debts in play, which makes them loose cannons sometimes. The Territory grounds the Wolf in a set of obligations, which ultimately grounds the Wolf in the themes of the game!
Yes, yes. In addition, we also found that the Wolf could sometimes be a problematic playbook when it gets disconnected from the rest of the group. Wolves have very few Debts, and tend to acquire fewer Debts in play, which makes them loose cannons sometimes. The Territory grounds the Wolf in a set of obligations, which ultimately grounds the Wolf in the themes of the game!
Wolves have few debts? I think I’m plying mine wrong. :0
Wolves have few debts? I think I’m plying mine wrong. :0
Mo Jave – I mean that they usually hold very few debts over others. They owe a ton!
Mo Jave – I mean that they usually hold very few debts over others. They owe a ton!
Oh! Then I’m definitely playing her right, Mark Diaz Truman ! 😛
Oh! Then I’m definitely playing her right, Mark Diaz Truman ! 😛