Tag: Kasper Brohus Allerslev

Yet another update to the chart! Read the former post here: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KasperBrohus/posts/JABCGKiXqiS

You might need to read it in order to understand everything.

This chart should be a little better, however it might make it look like you can’t aid or interfere, because it explicitly allow for two people to trigger moves at the same time.

I don’t think this is a problem per sé. It just requires the reader to understand that many processes can run in parallel with a conjoint outcome.

The last flowchart I made got a lot of response. Much of the response was motivated by the fact that I failed to convey the assumption made by the model.

I made a new model (an even simpler one), but this time I’m going to explain my assumptions.

It is assumed that the players are already in a situation that requires immediate action. The flowchart doesn’t explain how to initialize the game, just how to keep it going by explicitly telling the GM when different things happen.

The box after the chart has been updated to indicate, where the main part of the conversation will be. The arrows out tells you when the conversation triggers response from either a player move or GM move.

The “resolve all moves” box has a term called “non-miss”. This is means each move with a rolled hit, or each move that requires no roll. Also, it is assumed in this box that players can react in any way that makes sense before the final value of the roll has been calculated. I.e, you can spent a use from a bag of books in Dungeon World after you have seen your roll.

I might make a further update to make the “resolve moves” part more explicit, perhaps giving it its own sub-chart.

I updated the “GM’ing World Games” flowchart. I like this version much better myself, as it is much more neat.

Thoughts?

This one is for Vincent Baker: When you designed AW, where did you get the inspiration for “a success with a cost”?

The flowchart prototype is up!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8QkCTxTjMdLd19NUzQxQ2ZUZTA/edit?usp=sharing

EDIT: Changed the link to my Google Drive account. It’s in PDF format. Feedback?

As the text says, I was bored.

Originally shared by Kasper Brohus Allerslev

Was bored. Made this:

How to play AW-based games! A simple algorithm.

Step 1 (Initialization):

a) Choose someone to be the GM.

b) All non-GMs make a character.

c) GM initializes the game by presenting an opening situation and a context.

d) Go to step 2.

Step 2 (Players’ turn to speak):

a) GM says “What do you do?”.

b) Wait until a player says something.

c) Does the player give the GM a golden opportunity? Then go to step 4.

d) Does it trigger a move? Then go to step 3.

e) Otherwise, go to step 4.

Step 3 (Resolve move):

a) Carry out the instructions in the move.

b) If you rolled a miss, you have just given the GM a golden

opportunity. Go to step 4.

c) Did the effects of the move trigger a new move? Go to step 3.

d) Otherwise, go to step 4.

Step 4 (GM’s turn):

a) Did a player just give you a golden opportunity? Make a hard

move and go to step 2.

b) Otherwise, make a soft move and go to step 2.

Aaaaaand yet another question.

In the “snowpocalypse” session, we established that a small group of herders were trying to make three fully grown mammoths (one bull and two females) breed in captivity. The mammoths were taken when they were almost newly born, in case anyone wonders how they were captured 😉

While the group thought that was pretty great, I was wary about using them combatants (like on a miss, one of them breaks out of its cage and goes berserk), because I was unsure how to handle them as characters.

I wondered if I was supposed to alter their harm clock, or if I should just give them 3-armor (really big and really tough skin) and 3 harm. (Maybe 4 harm, they are pretty strong and they had metallic, razor tusks).

How would you go about using a creature weighing roughly 8 to 9 tonnes, and measures 13 ft at the shoulders?

Just a question.

I noticed that in the example dialogues in the book, the characters and NPC’s explicitly use the terminology “1-barter” in their in-character conversations.

I can kind of accept that because trying to explain that you are spending / asking for 1-barter in-character could be really confusing. It does feel weird to me though.

In Dungeon World I never had this problem as the game term is “coins”, which is doesn’t make it sound like game terminology in conversation.

I wonder if anyone has used a substitute word for this?

It’s not really a problem. It’s not like it ruins anything, but you know, having a suitable in-character word or turn of phrase would be pretty much akin to seasoning. It would just taste better.

Just something that I thought could be interesting to hear other people’s thoughts on.

What are the proverbial ninjas of Apocalypse World?

Snowpocalypse aftermath.

If anything, I’ve learned a lot about Apocalypse World today. The session wasn’t a total failure, we had some fun, but I seriously need to step it up a bit. I’m not going to write a list about the things I did wrong, because it would be too long and would totally put me down.

The feedback from Tim Franzke, Aleksandra Sontowska and Eric Nieudan was great though. That’ll help me for sure in future sessions. And I’m not fucking around; it will definitely help me.

The thing is that AW is a lot different to run than Dungeon World. It’s not that I didn’t know it, I just didn’t realize how much.

We talked it over, and we decided not to have a follow up session. The game was too bland, and I as MC wasn’t very excited about continuing the game. I’d much rather start over.

Too things I need to do more in particular; ask more questions and make much, much harder moves.