Respond with fuckery and intermittent rewards
I have a question about this principle. It sounds like it’s saying “Give the players what they ask for, but make sure to twist the knife in unexpected and unpleasant ways half to two thirds of the time, for successful rolls.”
Do I read that right? That even if you succeed in your roll, it has to be soured and tainted most of the time when you get it?
(For clarity’s sake, this is referring to the rules as presented in the Apocalypse World 2.0 PDF for Kickstarter backers.)
Not only on rolls, but yeah, on successful rolls too. You’re still giving them exactly what the roll says they get, after all, but you’re expressing the world/your apocalypse while you do so.
Right, so that’s an apocalypse-modeling thing, right? Even if things are good, they’re shit.
It explicates something for me in an AP of AW that bummed me the everloving fuck out when it happened. Knowing it doesn’t make the moment more fun in retrospect, but it’s nice knowing why it probably happened.
(I think it may be a good apocalypse-feel-maker, so I’m not criticizing it from that perspective.)
One half to two thirds of the time, across all of play. The players’ moves and the dice probabilities work with you on this, not against you, of course.
But it’s an important point that the principle does NOT tell you to always give the players what they ask for on high rolls and throw in unpleasant twists only on low rolls.
Got it. Thanks, Vincent!
So it’s: Complicate success and failure, with a high rate of failure across play. Successes don’t have to just be successes, failures don’t have to just be failures.
Lightbulb, thanks.
(That’s what I should’ve said instead of “Thanks, Vincent!”)
Yeah, Robert, its one of those “if you want to plant something and make it grow, you’re going to be digging in the dirt and rocks until your fingernails come off” kind of deals. Apocalypse-modeling thing.
Robert Bohl i bet you can simplify that down to “respond with fuckery and intermittent rewards” 🙂
Aaron Griffin but what is the sad fantasy version of that sentence?
EDIT: immediately answered it to myself after hitting save — “respond with tragedy and intermittent treasures” 😛
Going more-boring right now:
Complicate success and failure: Often, you’ll follow the dice, giving people what they were trying for when they succeed, and denying it to them when they fail on the roll. However, while always preserving the results of the dice roll, you can complicate either success or failure to make the world seem as alive, unpredictable, and dangerous as the Fallen Age is.
Yes, Juniper succeeded in getting Ghalk to bring Saeros to her, but Saeros arrives beaten nearly to death; what’s between Ghalk and Saeros, or was it a misunderstanding? Yes, Todora Bohemm failed in trying to trick Lados to let her into the party, but he lets her in anyway for some reason; what could it mean?
I like boring and direct! I can’t grok this part though: “However, while always preserving the results of the dice roll, ” did you mean to put a “not” in there somewhere?
No, you always have to honor the die roll is what it’s saying.
Ah I get it now. I think the “However” made me expect the part right after was going to be the opposite of the sentence before it.
Good to know! I’ll take a look at that text. Thanks, Aaron.
I think of it as the law of unintended consequences. The player gets what they worked for on the roll but 2/3rds of the time, there is fallout.
I usually think of it as zero-sum. Even when you succeed, you’re most likely going to make somebody else worse off. That’s going to come back and bite you – maybe not now, but eventually.
This makes it sound as if in solo games of AW, a die should be thrown along with the 2d6. If the result is high, no complication, but if the result is low, there’s a complication in the result.
The world itself is fuckery. Even when things go well as out need, there is bad shit just for existing regardless of the results of the dice. But some times you get moment of quiet, sunbathing on your tank with a cigarette and no one shooting at you.