People that like to GM/MC generally like playing the Hardholder

People that like to GM/MC generally like playing the Hardholder

People that like to GM/MC generally like playing the Hardholder

Discuss!

The Hardholder is one of the playbooks with the most input on the (starting) fiction and control over it. GMs like control (MCs not so much) and so they like the HH.

29 thoughts on “People that like to GM/MC generally like playing the Hardholder”

  4. Also disagree: I do a lot of GMing, across a range of games, and the  Hardholder is probably the playbook I’m least interested in. All that book-keeping and responsibility? No thanks.

  7. Doesn’t the GM track half of it/surplus and want only factor in at the beginning of the session. Then you will see it in play. 

  8. Lately I’ve realized that I prefer to Mc the games rather than playing as a character, by the way I’ve played just once and I’ve created a skinner.

    So, I don’t know if what you say makes sense for me too, have to ask to my psychologist.

    Anyway, just this morning I was thinking about playing an HH for a game that we are going to start tonight…

    …but not because I want more control, just because I want troubles on a bigger scale 😉

  9. I like to MC or play a Gunlugger or a Skinner. HHS is a sweet, sweet trap for folks who want to be in control, because how long does that status quo last?

  10. Meguey Baker If I’ve to play an HH, I’d make sure the status quo won’t last 😉

    as I’ve sayed before, I want troubles on a bigger scale.

  15. Those who fall into the HH trap are likely to have personalities similar to traditional controlling GMs I suppose. In that deviation from the status quo must be directional, and directed by them.

    However, I think the people who go after it without realizing it is a trap, are more likely to play other figures of authority and power in games. There are players who like being the de facto leader. Personally, I have found that to be the biggest trap of being a HH. They figure because the run the hold, they’re the leader. In play they find they aren’t even the first among equals when it comes to the other PCs.

  16. I am not sure i got my point across. 

    The thing i am talking about is, if you are the Hardholder you create the Hardhold. You have a lot of say in what is and isn’t there at first. This is quite powerful. Other PCs can also say what stuff is and isn’t there but your creation of the Hardhold factors in a lot of stuff. 

    Also, at least at first, you can set up a few laws -> later in game you as a group can figure out what they actually mean but a Hardholder totally can say: “people can have sex with whomever they like but they have to do so in public. Private sex is forbidden”. 

  17. Ouch! Hardholder players are probably not all control freaks…

    I think it is really interesting to see how groups of players work out their own version of the implied roles or status in the playbooks – I don’t think there is a wrong or right way to do this. Some groups are just going to work out entirely different views of status.

  19. I haven’t really seen players drawn to being a Hardholdre specifically for the setting input aspect of it. I definitely think someone with a clear vision of what a community in AW would look like or even the particular area should feel like they can solidify that vision via the Hardholder playbook–but a lot of that stuff is certainly up for discussion. Especially as the overall environment and type of apocalypse is going to matter quite a bit for the communities that are trying to deal with it.

    On the flip side, I’ve found that Weird characters appeal to setting builders because they open their brains earlier and more often, they end up defining the maelstrom the most. This can have a huge, broad impact on what things are like.

  20. I like to GM. I also like to play. When I play, I do not want to GM. The only control over the fiction I want is control over my character’s emotional circumstances and the ability to enjoy the fiction while retaining choices for my character. In short: when I play, I want someone else to cook and let me enjoy their food.

  22. My experiences so far have been limited, but positive. By no means have we gotten to the point where we could be considered fully used to the game.

  23. I mostly MC, and I want to play the Hardholder! And yet, every time I’ve played, I have played something else.

    And now, all I want to play is the Space Marine Mammal. I concede that 7-harm is a lot of fictional control. 🙂

  24. As a GM and a story-enabling player, I found that the Operator is a great vector for generating conflicts as well, but necessitates less control over the space.

  25. Operator is awesome for that. They’ve got Gigs which imply stuff going on, and they’ve got a crew to fill in cool people.

  26. Savvyhead here. I run games because I like to make things and share them with others, and MCing is the surest way to ensure that games happen. Savvyheads alter the world around them, create new stuff out of junk: sure, things break, but fixing them, making them better? That’s the stuff!

  28. I’ve yet to either play or MC Apocalypse World, though I’ve MCed a short run of tremulus and am running a Monsterhearts game at the moment, but to be perfectly honest, the Quarantine is the one for me. Possibly something to do with how in love with Fallout I am, but being the shiny godlike modern man emerging into the decayed future? So good.

    Or the Space Marine Mammal. Which, come to think of it, aside from the “being a dolphin from Mars” part, has kind of a similar vibe.

  29. Interesting theory.

    The guy who introduced me to Apocalypse World is playing The Hardholder in my game. 

    I don’t know which playsheet I’ll play after I’m done with my game. The Hardholder is a lot of fun,but I’ll probably pick Gunlugger or Chopper next.  

Comments are closed.