In my recent AW session, the Gunlugger is carrying a sniper rifle, so when he attacks a creature (zombie-like) from affar I wasn’t sure if he should use “Seize by force” or just do the damage. How do you, fellow MCs, handle this kind of attacks from affar?
In my recent AW session, the Gunlugger is carrying a sniper rifle, so when he attacks a creature (zombie-like) from…
In my recent AW session, the Gunlugger is carrying a sniper rifle, so when he attacks a creature (zombie-like) from…
Depends on the circumstances. If the gunlugger has time to take several shots and there’s no real danger to him or her, I would just inflict harm on the zombie. If the zombie could take cover, I would have the Gunlugger act under fire.
For me, sometimes, when it’s uncertain what Move should be triggered or chosen, i pick based on what results could be most interesting. Just letting the damage happen can be fun for a Gunlugger with a sniper rifle. But so can Seize by Force. Or Act Under Fire, even. But that’s my approach to it. I wouldn’t call it any kind of official advice.
Use Go Aggro for one sided violence.
Go Aggro is for when you want someone to do something with the threat of violence.
Well concealed
Where he or she has the drop? Straight up damage usually. AUF if the shot is especially difficult
Or there is some kind of interesting risk. Or a custom move if this sitch is something that happens often and is notable in some way.
Well he is definitively going to be playing the sniper… always shooting from a vantage point. So maybe making a custom move is the way to go…
Hamish Cameron also known as threat of one sided violence. I don’t have the quote right now but using GA for that is correct. It’s in the book.
I’d love to see a reference, Tim!
p 193
When somebody tries to kill somebody without their fighting back, going aggro is the move. It’s like the player said “I’m going aggro” — by shooting from way over here with a scoped rifle, by looping piano wire around his throat from behind, by whatever one-sided murderous act — “and what I want him to do is fall down bleeding and die.” If he forces her hand, he forces her hand; if he caves and does what she wants, he takes harm just the same.
Oh, I see, p.193. Sure, I guess, but I’m not sure why you wouldn’t just inflict harm.
It’s correct, true enough. It’s for attacking when the other side is unwilling to fight or not fighting yet. p193 covers the situation exactly as a matter of fact, but the fit isn’t always perfect. For this situation, the 7-9 answers “Barricade” is the most likely from a sniper attack. Perhaps get out of the way. The others would be tricky to do in context. I would do a custom sniper move just to see if it makes more interesting things happen. Lots of ways to structure that.
I say follow the fiction and that the answer is entirely dependant on what kind of zombie you’re dealing with. Which is a statement so open to possibilities that I cannot expand on this idea without wild speculation.
To that end, I’ll just say that, if it was my game, and we’re talking Walker style zombies, that you could only see one, and that you clearly have the time to line up the shot, I’d just have the player deal damage.
The question after this is ‘What heard the shot?’
Yes, in fact the Zombie thing might change this.
Sub
Thanks Tim Franzke I didn’t realized that the p193 examples actually includes my situation!
For shooting a zombie in the head, and I mean a George Romero-type of slow-moving doesn’t-think always-hungry kind of zombie, I would just let the player inflict harm, but then I would announce future badness by describing how there seem to be a lot more zombies on the horizon now, and some of them are definitely looking in the direction of the gunshot. If the player is barricaded on a sniper tower, then they’ll soon be surrounded. If they’re behind a fence, then it’s going to be pressed against by the zombie horde very soon. Describe all of this, then follow up with what do you do?
(seems pretty academic to me)
Sieze by force requires return fire. Its a battle where two sides are fighting over something.
If there is no capacity of retaliation, it’s Go Aggro. Or just do the damage because there are no ‘diff’ checks per se in AW just because we think the shot is hard.
I think you can’t Go Aggro with a zombie, because you can not intimidate or supress him. I think you are Acting Under Pressure, to be able to kill the zombie with your rifle, before he can reach you.
Yeah, many of the choices of Go Aggro just simply do not work.
Can a zombie barricade itself in?
Can a zombie get out of your way?
Can a zombie tell you what you want to know?
It seems like, to me, giving you what you want and sucking it up are the same thing in this scenario. What does that leave you with?
Inflicting harm!
Asking for a roll just means you’re subjecting the player to a hard move, which doesn’t seem quite fair, or realistic. Unless you’ve already been announcing future badness related to using the sniper rifle.
I think he is risking a Put someone in a spot or a Trade harm for harm.
If the context is that there isn’t any real consequence for the death of the zombie, I’d say Inflict harm. Go aggro also doesn’t make much sense unless failure if interesting or has a natural consequence (ie. if the gunlugger can just fire again). And unless there is an under fire, Doing Something Under Fire also wouldn’t be applicable.