Why Hack Apocalypse World.

Originally shared by David Rothfeder

Why Hack Apocalypse World.

So over on rpg geek there was a 24 hour rpg competition. Within this contest, there has been some controversy over whether a pbta game counts as an original game, or if using Vincent Baker​’s concepts counts as a head start in the design. I get the impression that most of the supporters of disqualifying such games don’t have much pbta experience, which can be pretty frustrating since it makes it hard to have a conversation about how the design of an AW hack is often more work than writing other games of similiar length. I thought I’d type out some of my thoughts of why a person would chose to hack AW rather than start from scratch.

1. Apocalypse World as a system drives the narrative: as a system, AW really does create plot through a snowball of the different mechanics in a way few other games do. This takes a lot of pressure off of both MC and player to decide what should happen in the game. Basically, choices go in, plot comes out, and new choices need to be made. I doubt I’m alone in thinking that this isn’t accidental in the design.

2. AW gives us new language and a new view point: the design approach to aw is so different than a lot of people were used to before they encountered the game in very good ways. It changed the way I thought of planning, plot, the gm – player relationship, and dissemination of information. It also showed a different way of approaching what it means to go to a roll. These new ideas are often hard to describe why they work differently so it is often easier to use the terminology given to us by AW.

3. Mechanics in AW were idividualized to the game: most people think the key mechanic to aw is 2d6+stat. While this is mostly true, it doesn’t mean the same thing as it does in other systems. While this randomization system is pervasive, it isn’t the heart of what’s going on. Instead, I see the heart of aw and it’s hacks in its moves. These moves need to be specialized for each game as they are what trigger and give flavor to the snowball effect. When writing a hack, you could start with the basic aw moves (I’ve done this, but it definitely limits the uniqueness of the hack), but in order to fit the setting your trying to make, every one of these moves need to be written to encourage the play your imagining. This forces the designer to think a lot about game play since there are a lot of moves in an pbta game.

4. It’s easy to learn: pbta games are easy to teach and learn, especially to those who have played other pbta games. The moves are clearly stated, including what narrative situation triggers them. There is a minimum of book keeping, and yet a lot of information about a character’s status is tracked. Experience is easy and quick, and allows for instant leveling up. There are other games that achieve the same thing, but aw uses some very convienent formatting.

5. The creators are very supportive: I’ve seen both Vincent Baker​ and Meguey Baker​ talk about the system and encourage others to build using their ideas. They don’t charge people to use the pbta tag, and help advertise upcoming hacks on the market. They show that they want to see others succeed and that they do not wish to be agressive about protecting their intellectual property. Meguey told me that their policy on pbta (paraphrasing) is “anybody who felt inspired by AW and thinks their game is a hack of the system is welcome to use the tag.” I think this is a much cooler way to think about it then how others have reacted “what if a game seems to be an AW hack but doesn’t want to identify as such.”

6. Give credit where credit is due: I absolutely feel like pbta does not mean copying aw. I’ve seen games that do and I’ve generally found them less appealing. There are also games that use pieces of aw, but then adds and changes things in very new and cool ways. But a lot of the better hacks redesign everything from the ground up. The games may still resemble aw, but they’re definitely their own beasts. This doesn’t mean these games don’t owe something to Vincent and AW. By marking a game ptba, it says that the designer learned from AW and that they used what they learned to make something new, and that the creator wants to acknowledge where they learned it from. It’s like how an impressionist admits to being an impressionist not because they copied from other impressionists, but because they were inspired by them.

7: Ptba players have become an emerging culture: at least I think it’s close enough to matter. There are communities of significant size dedicated to various aw hack, there is a regular practice of fans expanding these systems, and there is developing vocabulary used specially by those players. By calling a game an aw hack, you tap into this specific auidience In a way that they can easily recognize what is being offered. The pbta tag is an important part of displaying the identity and history of the game design.

There are a lot of reasons to chose to make a game an AW hack, but making things easier on the designer isn’t one of the. I do think that making a pbta game can be the easiest thing in the game design world, but making one that isn’t a simple reskin is extremely difficult (see number 3). If a person makes a simple reskin, it is easily recognizable as such, and generally will be treated as such. Making a more original ptba that feels unique and inovative is a lot of work.