Tag: Jamil Vallis-Walker

When you claim to know something about the situation at hand, say what you know and roll plus weird. On a 10 plus, you’re exactly right. On a 7-9, you’ve got it mostly right, but your missing a key detail. On a miss, as sure as you are, the maelstrom/world seems to think (and be) otherwise.

I’ve been thinking about the intersection of the extravagant and the mundane in AW. One the one hand, players are crazy powerful, force-of-nature individuals who can singlehandedly change the entire social and political landscape around them. On the other hand, questions of food, space, bullets, and human ambitions are still the primary motivators for play.

Dogs does a similar thing here, where mundane conflicts within a community can escalate to demons, gunfights, and killing stewards in the streets.

Anyone have any thoughts on this from a design perspective, and on how these two (seemly disparate) feels can coexist within a single game?

When you coerce someone through violence, roll. On a hit, you inflict harm. Furthermore, 10+, you choose 3; On a 7-9, choose 2:

-You inflict controlled harm, up to harm rolled

-They buckle, fall, or cower (their choice)

-They cry out, or don’t (your choice)

-They suffer -1 forward

The setting context is a brutal ancient world. The feeling I’m going for is that violence is a powerful motivator, but also horrible.

My questions are:

-Does this convey those feelings?

-Is the move effective enough?

-Is the move consequential enough?

-Is it too heavy for anyone to actually use?

So I’m toying with some corruption mechanic ideas for a PbtA game and have a few ideas I’m floating between:

— — —

When corruption befalls you, roll plus steady. On a 10+, you weather its pollution and emerge unscathed. On a 7-9, its darkness lingers – take 1 corruption for your these deeds. On a miss, its poison leaches into your heart, and finds a hold there – take 2 corruption for this act.

When corruption befalls you, roll 1d6 per point of the corruption in question. Each 6 rolled adds 1 corruption. If you reach 5 corruption, you are altered. If you reach 8 corruption, you are consumed.

When corruption befalls you, roll plus that corruption. On a 10+, its poison leaches into your heart, and finds a hold there – increase that corruption by 1. On a 7-9, its darkness lingers – roll again when the world player asks. On a 6 or less, you weather its pollution and emerge unscathed.

— — —

I’m curious as to whether resisting corruption should depend on a main character stat (the first option), or the corruption itself (the second 2). I like #3 for its simplicity, but I’m afraid of ending up with a whole second set of stats for the various corruptions possible (different corruptions have different effects). I’m wary of creating a corruption design that becomes overly complicated and turns into rampant bookkeeping, so I might end up tossing the whole “multiple corruptions” at all, but it is very setting appropriate.

Additionally, while the corruption is a part of the setting, I also don’t want to design a “don’t fuck up your you’ll get corrupted!” sort of game that places a punitive moral authority on the player’s actions. I’m thought about creating some incentives in corruption to counter this, but this seems like a patch-job fix.

Thoughts?

Vincent Baker and Meguey Baker – thanks for involving the PbtA community in the playtesting/shaping of AW:Dark Ages!

Originally shared by Jamil Vallis-Walker

Hey all – so Jason Martinez , Grace Lapsley  and I are aiming to setup a weekly(ish) game of AW:Dark Ages on Thursdays from 6:30pm to 9pm (PST). We’re looking for 1-2 more players to join us. If your interested in joining us, shoot me a PM!