Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Scrape

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26
1
Monsterhearts / Re: Questions about Conditions
« on: August 30, 2014, 02:12:12 AM »
A condition sticks around until it's alleviated, so someone could possibly tap it more than once. Unless, of course, tapping it would get rid of it, which can happen. Consider: Alicia is Ostracized right now. Daniel tries to persuade her to help him out. Now, everyone knows that Daniel is the coolest, so he's like "Hey Alicia, why don't you tag along here?" The player wants to use Ostracized against her- obviously she'll jump at the chance to be seen with super cool Daniel, right? So sure, he gets to use it, but once everyone sees her with Daniel, well omigod wtf she's part of the cool kids now?! And Ostracized maybe goes away and no one else gets to use it again.

My personal instinct would be "no stacking Conditions" 'cause a +5 or whatever is crazy. But then again, maybe it makes sense sometimes? Like someone has been kicked so hard they'll do anything to stand up again. They don't stand a chance.

2
Apocalypse World / Re: "The Solace" Playbook is ruining our game
« on: August 29, 2014, 03:00:23 AM »
No one is able to do much of anything they want then.

Maybe I shouldn't focus on this one line, but do the other characters really only want to commit violence? Could it be that the rest of the table is pushing for physical conflict when it's not necessary at all, and the Solace really does want to explore better ways to solve problems? That's kinda scary, right there, and maybe the player chose that playbook because they didn't want to just see bloodbath after bloodbath and wanted to explore something besides fights.

Anyway, assuming that is not the case, why are these other characters bringing around the Solace when they head out to do their dirty work? And why is the Solace preventing every single fight? Is there really nothing worth fighting for in this apocalypse? We've got slavers and madmen and flat-out mutants in the wastes that are hurting people when the Solace isn't around.

Maybe show the Solace what happens after the groups disperse: the pent-up anger gets taken out on the weak elsewhere. Show them that this move isn't an "I win" button, it's just forestalling violence and putting it off-screen, where no one can prevent it.

Also, definitely talk to the other PCs about this. I seriously don't understand why they're hanging out with a psychic pacifist when they want to crack skulls. In my games, the PCs are almost never entirely present in every scene: they're always off pursuing their own agendas and sometimes coming together when those agendas coincide. Remind your other players that violence isn't off the table, it's around the corner... where the Solace can't see them. Hell, plant that seed in their mind that maybe they're better off without the Solace after all... could lead to some good drama at the table.

Have they talked about it amongst themselves?

3
AW:Dark Age / Re: The New Stats
« on: March 26, 2014, 07:42:34 PM »
Confront An Obstacle YESSSSSSS that's great, just perfect. I also really liked Claim Your Right but these outweigh the loss by far. Great stuff!

4
AW:Dark Age / Re: Feedback - Havenshine
« on: March 19, 2014, 08:03:12 PM »
Personally, I think Oaths should be between PCs. It semester like it would strengthen the bonds and heighten the tension. Like, sure, swear as many lower-case oaths as you like to NPCs. Go ahead and break them, too- that'll get tidied up in the game fiction. But a capital-o Oath to a PC? That's something else. That's the real stuff.

I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work both ways, mechanically. Just a different emphasis.

5
AW:Dark Age / Re: Thoughts while reading
« on: March 16, 2014, 07:21:08 PM »
I'd like a Sharp playbook, too. I was thinking along the line of Littlefinger, or maybe later-book Tyrion (Game of Thrones characters, for those who haven't read). Someone with their fingers in all the pies, a lot of high-stakes plays but the "power behind the throne" kinda vibe.

Maybe it's hard to have them get directly involved from the get-go, but I think it can happen.

6
AW:Dark Age / Re: Welcome
« on: March 16, 2014, 05:05:42 PM »
It's on the lumpley games main page. It's "lumpley". It's a gmail address.

7
AW:Dark Age / Re: Maps/Holdings
« on: March 14, 2014, 08:49:02 PM »
Some guidelines would be helpful for "eyeballing" the population. Like, are we talking realistic medieval populations or bigger fantasy style numbers? It's better decided at the table, maybe, but it's be cool to have some guidleines. Like, "a Hamlet has 30-100 people in it. A Village might have 100-250..." and so on. Some ideas on the how big the map should be and what effect thar might have on your game, too.

I suspect that this is stuff that will come out during playtesting.

8
AW:Dark Age / Re: Maps/Holdings
« on: March 13, 2014, 11:47:48 PM »
Personally, in absence of rules I would turn it over to the table. Like, "what other clans are out there? What about this big empty chunk of the map, who dwells there? So, <I>nobody</I> owns the mountains at all? Do you think there are any weird freemen up there?"

And based on their answers, kinda eyeball population from there.

9
AW:Dark Age / Re: Choosing Rank
« on: March 13, 2014, 11:44:27 PM »
I imagine that within each 'faction,' rank must be very important, at least to high-ranking clans or houses or whatever. So like, an Old Blood knows where they stand among the other nobles, especially those who follow the way of Old Blood. Then they meet someone who follows a different system and each of them thinks the other is 'beneath' them.

There's some implied war for the crown stuff, right? So lineage and primacy are probably a Big Deal in the fiction. Each table may vary, I guess.

10
AW:Dark Age / Re: Choosing Rank
« on: March 13, 2014, 07:55:09 PM »
What would be cool would be player or mc moves related to Rank. "Present a problem above or below their Rank" or something like that.

11
AW:Dark Age / Re: I miss Going Aggro and Manipulate
« on: March 13, 2014, 03:12:35 PM »
I really don't like asking the player to roll the same move twice unless it's really needed for some reason. It kindra reduces the importance of rolling, if you can just do it again. That's why I'm happy with Vincent's idea that the roll stands, but new circumstances give an opportunity for change, still.

I think if the player is demanding the same thing from the same person, it's still part of the same move.

12
AW:Dark Age / Re: Choosing Rank
« on: March 12, 2014, 11:06:06 PM »
It's also seriously fun to have a mix of social castes at the same table, in any game. Mechanically, they're all good at what they do. It's more about what the player thinks is interesting.

13
AW:Dark Age / Re: A few questions and observations regarding Dark Ages
« on: March 12, 2014, 04:49:58 PM »
Good to know!

14
AW:Dark Age / Re: First Thoughts: Fates
« on: March 12, 2014, 04:49:09 PM »
It's a pretty excellent area for hacking, though. Playbook-specific Fates would be cool. It's an area to stick abilities with a built-in cost. Y'know, like, "Death is clear to me, but so is life." (I dunno, take a +1forward to Read moves, but you had to take 3 harm to get there). It's got a lot of play room.

15
AW:Dark Age / Re: A few questions and observations regarding Dark Ages
« on: March 12, 2014, 04:02:13 PM »
When it comes to the War Herald, they get all that xp but only if they charge into battle like, every session, right? To me, it looks like a feast-or-famine thing, and sort of the Herald's motivation to bring war with them everywhere. At some point, the other PCs might have to go "we're trying to negotiate with the heathens, please stop your endless offensive march."

(But I haven't played yet, this is just me reading the playtest. Maybe it's too easy for the herald to battle endlessly with no repercussions, especially with trolls and whatnot?)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26