Tag: Patrick Scaffido

Does anybody run or know of a good pbp or pbem pbta game that is open to lurkers or can be read? I’m trying to learn how that would work for games and woiuld like to follow along with how other people have tried it.

So I’m watching Gotham and actually enjoying it despite my expectations. So naturally I think of gaming it.

What characters in Gotham get playbooks and what sort of archetype would they be?

My List:

Fish Mooney – Crime Miniboss (needs better name)

Edward Nigma – (future madman)

Jim Gordon – (maverick cop)

Harvey Bullock – (cynical cop)

Bruce Wayne – (rich orphan)

Selina Kyle – (street kid)

Alfred Pennyworth – (ninja butler, again how do you describe him?)

Don Falcone – (city crime boss)

Oswald Cobblepot – (scheming survivor)

Don Maroni – (rival mob boss)

Ivy – (orphaned crazy girl)

Delware or Flass – (cop on the make)

Barbara Kean- (drugged out heiress)

Allen and  Montoya – ( upright cop in a twisted world)

Sara Essen – (frazzled police chief) (I’m not too interested in her but could see this ending up fun)

Butch Gilzean – (loyal enforcer)

And most of the single episode villains, visitors, vigilantes could be fun playbooks if thought about.

Some of these probably overlap but I’m loving it. Maybe pull from The Hood and that other gangster game I saw and bring it together for a fun session? I’m just brainstorming here.

Need Some Help Comprehending Apocalypse World:

What are the implications of highlighting the various stats in Apocalypse World?

What I see: Highlighting low stats can challenge a player and Highlighting high stats lets the player show off.

I’m pretty sure I’m missing something.

While watching the How We Role with Vincent Baker , the players look like their making their choices based on what is amusing or how their character relates with the other. Baker seems more deliberate about what he picks but I’m not sure what that means for the game.

So thinking about another thing that I find important about AW and its offspring that I haven’t seen discussed yet (if it has been, please point me the right way).

There are no “safe” rolls.

I was at DnD game recently where my wizard was out spells and I took quite a few shots with my crossbow despite the very thin likelihood that I was going to hit anything. Also whenever a search check was called for, everyone rolled even if their modifier was negative on the off chance they might succeed.

I call these safe because there isn’t a downside to attempting and failing them. No consequence and no importance.

If I tried the same thing in AW such as, for example, reading a situation no matter what I roll the situation changes the situation even a little. Maybe the MC is gentle or maybe not but the act of taking action or making a move always changes the game state (if I’m interpreting the rules properly).

In that same combat, my wizard (probably a brainer now) would be hiding and not taking crossbow potshots because he’d know if he stuck his head up he could get hit. He’d be desperately doing something else to help out or get away. Or he’d be taking those risks and hoping he hits someone in an eye or something.

And I wouldn’t have spent 30+ minutes rolling unimportant attack checks that I was never going to pass anyway.

This results in the dice becoming significant, I think. Every time we need dice, the roll matters. And that seems to be an important part of the underlying design behind the mechanics.

Thoughts? Am I off base? Neat applications?

An interesting discussion is arising in the 24 hour rpg community over at rpggeek. Are games Powered by the Apocalypse their own game or a modified version of Apocalypse World?

I described my submission as Powered by the Apocalypse to help communicate the play style of the adventure while using what I feel are different rules for stats and very different (albeit poorly explained since 24 hours) moves.

This may disqualify me from winning (which I’ll be sad about but is not the point) because it may not be an original game.

From reading Vincent Baker ‘s comments on reusing rules, it appears he would consider any hack that uses his concepts but original text applied in new ways as distinct from Apocalypse World.

For me, I consider Powered by the Apocalypse to be more about the principles of game design (such as quick character generation, open endedness, be a fan of the players, and moves vs the games fiction). Thus I would consider many of the AW hacks I’ve read to be distinct.

So, recognizing that the line is an arbitrary human construction and really it shifts based on personal preference and isn’t really there at all,  what is the line between an AW hack that is just reskinned Apocalypse world vs an AW hack that is its own game?

Some games to consider:

I’m playtesting something for Ben Lehman that I only know is an AW hack because he told me so in the introduction. It is diceless and usually a solitaire game and has no playbooks (to start).

Paul Riddle’s Undying is PbtA but is also such a different experience that I has to look closely to see the AW stuff under the skin. It is in my opinion a great hack that recreates the moves effectively and the blood mechanic creates a very enjoyable game of resource management that also results in effective story. Is it its own game or a subset of AW?

Legacy reworks Apocalypse World to focus on lineage and society generation. Same setting, different focus. I’m not familiar enough to go into more detail but I’m hoping to change that. Is it its own game or a subset of AW?

Over the Edge vs Vampire the Masquerade- they were developed in tandem and in their early stages overlapped (both still retain the dice pool mechanic). Are they the same game or different?

Of the games I’ve played that one that might qualify as the most overlap maybe the Nobilis hack and Monster Hearts. Both are awesome and have redone moves and playbooks to focus the setting. I love both. They seem to rely more heavily on the text of Apocalypse World for structure.

I have an opinion, but I’m curious what everyone else’s thoughts are.

https://rpggeek.com/article/20586603#20586603

More rules questions.

I’ve been thinking about the nature of the concept “move” as opposed to D&D’s “action” or “turn” in other RPGs. My question is “What constitutes a move?”

In one of his posts, Vincent Baker mentioned something similar to the idea that basic moves are what define the core of what a game is. So what makes a move, what should be a move, and what shouldn’t be?

It seems better to me to have fewer and broader basic moves that can encompass a wide variety of actions the way go aggro can be both violent and social or how cool under fire can be practically anything you do while under fire.

I was watching Pretty Little Liars with my girlfriend and I thought a game based on that show would never have a fight move or even perhaps a go aggro type move. It’s more “investigate” or “avoid” and done properly investigate could even come to include actions like finding a way to get someone out of a locked death trap (usually action sequences in the show are someone trapped and someone else trying to save them).

As I work on my AW hack I wonder how broad to make it so it both fits all the potential player actions but also reinforces the genre.

I’ve been thinking about the design of Vincent Baker ‘s Apocalypse World and related PbtA games and I think my favorite part of the game is the lack of an attack/combat mechanic.

Instead damage and harm to characters comes as a side effect of another action. If you’re laying down covering fire and the other guy panics and runs he might get wounded. If you’re waving a gun in someone’s face to convince them to give you a name/item/etc they may end up wounded but each move has many uses outside of combat.

Many similar attempts I’ve seen in games end up either removing violence as an option and focusing solely on the other options or being a little boring.

It’s still brutal and violent like a Mad Max movie but it what matters is isn’t the damage roll but the achievement. The lack of a combat mechanic while still having threat, danger, and potential death/difficulty is the best innovation that Apocalypse and PbtA games bring to the RPG table. Thoughts?