I’ve posted before about the PbtA game I am working on. Malleus, a game of 17th Century monster hunting. My work on the game has stalled out, in large part because the main rules are pretty firm and now I am trying to write move commentary and GM advice, and I am finding it a real slog.
In the hope that some more feedback will help, I’m posting the latest draft:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yGpNkbjkI1ycvHftMSYNwh1I-8JCyv4x9LvthPGsb8g/edit?usp=sharing
A lot of the text is still very much a work in progress.
It’s looking good.
I know that feeling of the work being too hard to manage: I’ve found the only things to do are to keep hammering away at it, or to switch projects for a short time.
.
I have read it. And i like.
I’ll hope to try next month.
I’m liking the theme! I’ll try and read it – playtesting is a bit hard to organise at the moment but who knows? 🙂
This is Fantastic. I loved the last version.
Will have to look at this in a bit.
Oh man! I have to remember this when I get home. I have moves and impression lists for the 1770s that would most likely help.
.
If find that at the point of discussing moves you need more “boots on the ground” experience with the game. Situations that don’t clearly leap to a particular move or mechanic or outliers where the process becomes less clear.
Micro sessions with another player or yourself for figuring out how you would play it can help.
Cover art is wonderful. I’ll have a look when I can!
Dave Sealy Are the play books updated?
Hey Dave Sealy, have you read the Monster Blood Tattoo, tales of the Half Continent series? It seems rather apt!
Great game by the way!
I think the basic move threaten needs to have a choice that involves fear or retribution. Ie: they stand down and cower from you….
Nathan Roberts I haven’t read any of the Monster Blood Tattoo stuff, no. But I have come across it while looking for inspiration and it has some neat art for that world.
Kill a monster, get a tattoo with its blood – gives you powers to hunt more monsters (and perhaps become like them). So good.
Gary Anastasio sorry, only just saw your question. Unfortunately no, I haven’t updated the playbooks yet. It is something I need to do soon so I can get some more play testing happening. The current version of the Archetypes are probably sufficiently ready for a new set.
My first thoughts upon a quick glance:
1) Do “Persuade” and “Threaten” really need to be separate moves or could they be combined? I notice that Threaten doesn’t have any options for PC responses, although Persuade does.
2) I’d combine the text for Basic and Advanced moves so everything about a move is easily accessible. You could use bold text or an icon/bullet point to indicate which can only be used after they’ve been “advanced.”
3) I’d like to see a different term for “Advanced” that has more setting flavor to it? Maybe “Mastered”, as in ‘you’ve mastered that skill.’
4) Keep an eye out for passive voice. You’re no doubt going to tackle this in the final editing phases, but it’s something you can keep an eye out for now as you edit or write new material. That’ll save you time in the end.
For instance, one section says: “Sometimes a move will call for you to roll +Faith or +Corruption. When you are called upon to roll +Faith, the bonus to your roll is equal to your current Faith level on the Faith/Corruption track, likewise, when you are called upon to roll +Corruption, the bonus to your roll is equal to your current Corruption level on the Faith/Corruption track.”
It could instead read:
“When a move instructs you to roll +Faith or +Corruption, take a bonus equal to your current level on the Faith or Corruption track (as appropriate).”
Another example says:
“Persuade is the move to use when…”
It could instead read:
“Use Persuade when…”
Mark Plemmons In regards to the difference between Persuade and Threaten:
The fictional consequences of each move is very different. Threaten is likely to devolve into violence from the active player while Persuade is more about quid-pro-quo.
Since violence is more easily parsed in terms of mechanical and fictional consequences for PCs and NPCs, you don’t really need to differentiate between the two in Threaten.
Persuasion however is all about offering a carrot, and PCs are motivated by very different carrots than their characters. Offering mechanical consequences alongside the the fictional ones to players helps maintain player agency.
I agree with Mark about writing in a more active, present tense voice. It’s something I need to work on in my game too. It really makes a difference for clarity when you tell the reader “These are the rules. Do the thing.” While the game you play at the table is a conversation, the book telling you how to have that conversation is a set of instructions.
I got some great advice about removing the word “will” from my document. Getting rid of phrases like “This will do that,” “You will find that,” and replacing them with phrases “This is that”
When you want to indicate player choice to do a thing or not, I opt for “You may choose to” I believe the idea is to write like the subject of the text is to discuss something happening right now, not sometime in the future.
Yeah, using the passive voice in my writing is a bad habit I picked up as a lawyer (it’s not necessarily a bad habit for a lawyer).