No Status Quos – What does it actually mean?

No Status Quos – What does it actually mean?

No Status Quos – What does it actually mean?

The rules tell us on multiple occasions “There are no status quos in Apocalypse World.” I know when I first read that I thought “How does that work? If there’s no normalcy, then what is there to be threatened? What about the Hardholder and the Maestro D’? Surely they shouldn’t lose the stuff that makes them cool just to keep things changing.” But I think from rereading the text I’m starting to get a feel for what it means.

Firstly, it means “Nothing is sacred,” and it’s primarily aimed at the MC’s NPCs, power structures, and establishments. It’s a reassurance that the game is not going to break if the PCs topple a major warlord, something that in another game might “end the campaign”.

Secondly, it means “Life is never just easy.” You’re not living peacefully in Hardholdia when suddenly some bandits attack. You’re scraping a living in Hardholdia, but Dremmer’s gang is always poised for a raid, a growing faction is always looking to undermine your influence, and everyone’s always wondering if this week the supply caravan is going to show up. This is from the First Session rules: You don’t establish some solid, perfect situation and then force the MC to go away and think about how to disrupt it; all that stuff is already there from the beginning. It’s impossible to get rid of it. Conflicting needs, shaky agreements, PC-NPC-PC triangles. Solving a problem is just pissing someone else off, like tipping a see-saw, and then they tip back.

As for the Hardhold or the Establishment, they can be threatened without taking them away entirely – maybe the Establishment gets slandered and stops making enough money to get by, or maybe it becomes the meeting place for some terrifying gang. After all, if you take them away and make it impossible to get back, you’ve lost something everyone is interested in. It’s still possible, of course: nothing is sacred, but I think it was unimaginative of me for my mind to head there first.

What do you think? Am I on the mark? Missed the point entirely? Stating the obvious? Reading too much into it? (Wouldn’t be the first time). Let me know!