[Playing to Find Out What Happens]

I ran Tower of the Stargazer. We had a good time. Couple things:

Playing to Find Out What Happens

This principle is pretty much the same in LotFP. The only difference is that because DW is an adventure game, you are allowed to make up the dungeon on the fly. You are not allowed to do this in LotFP (or old-school D&D generally). I think you might be falling for the idea that this principle means you should just make up everything on the fly, but no -- you can use a pre-written dungeon for DW the same as you would for D&D (and in fact there is nothing in the GM sections about using a module--just advice in that appendix).

The main thing is not to remember not to plan scenes in a linear order and not to decide the outcome of scenes, as this is a common failing in adventure-based games. But the wizard being a jerk is not a "thing that happens," it's just who he is. So you know that he will say whatever he has to in order to get free and then he's like "GTFO bitches." That is fine, you still don't know what will happen, and you will decide exactly what he does when the time comes. Will they even free him? My players decides to stand outside the circle taunting him and making fun of him for being a bad wizard. They onl freed him by accident and the first thing he did was drop death spells on them because why would he tell them to get out at that point? He was pissed and they knew they had it coming. Did I know that was going to happen? No idea, I just role-played the dude in the moment based on his description and we found out what happened.

You can run the adventure pretty much as-is and it will be fine. You don't even have to connect the PCs to it, as long as you get their input on the parts of the world that their PCs actually ARE familiar with, which is probably everything outside the tower.

Well, okay: as-is except for one thing...

Poison

The front door of the dungeon having a poisoned handle is a dick move. This kind of dick move is okay in LotFP, it is not okay in DW. Poison deep inside the dungeon, where players should damn well know better than to pick up things that look like they might be poisoned? Sure. You drink the wine in some wizard's tower? WTF are you crazy? You look deep into some wizard's magic mirror? Okay, buddy, roooooll them dice. You pull all the levers on his crazy huge machine? Now you're really asking for it!!! Sure. But not the front door.

Tower of the Stargazer is written for a game where the dungeon is the most important element. Nobody cares who your character is. He dies at the front door? Roll up another, it takes like 5 minutes. But Dungeon World is about the characters and their adventure, the dungeon is not the important part. Killing a Dungeon World PC at the front door to the dungeon is kind of like D&D PCs removing the front doors of the dungeon and selling them because they are made of gold and then retiring, without ever setting foot in the dungeon proper. You show up to D&D to explore a dungeon, but you show up to Dungeon World to play a character on an adventure, so if they die before they have any adventure, they're not really getting to play.

So, make 'em sick or something, sure, but don't kill anybody at the front door.

Aha! So many choices makes you crazy already! That's good, I hadn't thought of it that way.

You can't edit posts after the first 20-30 minutes on these forums. Some people use Google docs to host their playbooks and DW classes and then post the links on forums, so they can always edit them later. Or back in 2010 we used to just post the whole playbook again in the thread even though it's a hassle.

Cool, I like the messenger concept. As a sharp playbook, this is sort of like an alternative to the Driver, though. Which is okay! My Horseman is the same, but when the MC offers this one to the players, it probably shouldn't also be played in the same game as either of those two playbooks. Unless maybe both players think they can make it work.

With the hold-based stealth move, one thing to keep in mind is that it is harder to zoom in and zoom out on the action than the stealth move in the rulebook. With that one, you can just do one roll for sneaking into a compound, but when you spend hold on actions, you're more constrained to a smaller scope. That's not a bad thing, just different.

These moves are pretty simple and focused on highlighting what the playbook is about though, that's good!

Maybe add something like this to the Hx: You have a message for one of them, you get Hx+2 with them. Then the MC can ask what is in the message!

Getting better! I like the freaky weapon attachment, it makes the character seem even more dangerous-crazy. Maybe too many options for Exposed though? I think I've seen research that says the human brain has problems considering more than 7 options at a time, so I try to go with no more than 7 unless it's absolutely necessary or it's a gear list or something.

Oh Hi kind of seems like 2 moves, the stat substitution move and the higher modifier on a hit. Dunno if that's a big deal or not, though.

Coo Coo Countdown could use something to create some fiction, I think. Maybe take a cue from the Last Breath move from Dungeon World, like maybe:
- When you reach 12:00 o'clock on the harm meter, instead of marking a debility, the maelstrom will make a deal with you: if you agree to accomplish what it demands, reset your harm to 9:00 o'clock and live. If you refuse the maelstrom and don't want to die, the MC chooses which debility you mark, you don't. Until you accomplish what the maelstrom asks of you, it will not save you again.

And then you have a reason to live AND a new motivation that will drive the game forward.

There's no modifiers for difficulty. How difficult it is to achieve a particular result, mechanics-wise, is a choice made by the player during character creation, not the GM during play.

The best way to handle these two situations seems pretty simple to me. Discern realities is the go-to move if a PC eyeballs the fey creature in disguise. Says so right in the description. Meanwhile, if a skilled thief searches a common villager, just tell them where they find the item.

Oh, sorry, I didn't mean you should change the options like that. Now you are just picking which bad thing the GM doesn't get to do to you instead of picking a thing that happens. It's usually more productive to the action if you pick a thing that happens (and then one thing leads into another pretty smoothly).

What I mean by picking from the character's perspective would be something like this maybe:
* You manage to hold on to the fading, but take +1 Fade.
* You let the fading leak out onto other people and they start to forget you.
* You hold on to the fading so tightly you lose track of when and where you are.

And then the GM isn't thinking "okay, I can't do the one they picked as a consequence so what do I do instead, if anything?" Does that make sense?

For the Void Aegis trigger I might even make it something like "when you flinch from a blow" so that if you decide your character flinches involuntarily, without thinking about the fade, you still roll for the move, because it has become ingrained. It's still the player's choice, but maybe adds some nuance to the character's situation?

Pretty sure existentialism is what destroyed magic forever. If I were a wizard, I'd for sure develop some venom to combat it directly.

More seriously:

1. What kind of GM is going to call for Falling Into Oblivion as a hard move? I think some more direction would be good, since as-is, it's dependent entirely on how hard the GM wants to push, which doesn't necessarily match up with how hard the player wants the GM to push. Right? I think some more explicit prompts for them to have that conversation and get on the same page would be beneficial.

2. I think if you start fading you should just get the two starting moves. Whether or not the player wants to pursue the advanced moves is up to them. The package deal, 3 for the price of 1, is weirdly complicated. Go with 2 for nothing, pay for the rest, I say.

3. The trigger for Do Not Go Gentle is vague and wishy-washy. It's like when you sorta do a thing that sorta means something. Like, it's okay if we have to talk about what a characters actions mean and how they feel about it and the intention and stuff in Monsterhearts, but I'd steer clear of that in DW.  At the same time I appreciate the attempt to make the trigger rather broad, like the basic moves, and not too specific that it doesn't get used.

If I were to use this in play (and I would consider it), I'd go with something like: When you make/cement a new relationship with a person, place, or thing, roll the move. Normally, I would say the 10+ should be 1-fade and the 7-9 should be a trade, remove 1-fade is you remove a thing from your life as well, but since it's roll+nothing, I'd say make the miss result the choice to lose both a fade and something else. Partly just so that something happens when you meet the trigger requirements that is related to the predicament.

4. What's with the HP damage? What is this supposed to achieve? It looks like a weird pacing thing or a consequence that is supposed to feel sort of like it has teeth? Because 1 damage really doesn't, although losing half your HP (what is "health"?) will definitely cut a fight short, one way or another. Which doesn't seem like an interesting consequence, really. Maybe there's something here I'm just not seeing?

5. "When blows meant for you hit nothing instead" is what triggers this move? Cause it looks like that' supposed to be the result.

6. Last comment is one that's more of an AW thing, and perhaps less of a big deal in DW, but the options for those moves are things the player picks, not things the character picks. It's fine to play that way if you like it, but DW does ask you to play your character from your character's perspective, and every time you choose what happens to your character instead of choosing what your character does, thinks, feels, reacts, or remembers, you're taken out of that mode.

Definitely like the idea, though.

I like the idea of goblin wizard as irresponsible mess-maker although the uncontrollable fire thing is a bit weirdly specific. I dunno if this is any better but this is what it made me think of:

Goblin Wizard: Wanton destruction and mayhem is your very essence, you are a public menace. Unless you specifically cast a spell carefully, it causes harm, random property damage, or similar mayhem. The GM will tell you what.

The GM might have a hard time deciding what breaks when you cast invisibility, of course, but I'd probably go with the spell causing a lunar eclipse or breaking every source of light within a mile or two. You know, you're even MORE invisible in the dark!

Also you might want to give certain characters a move that is flat-out better than the generic move.

Like maybe everybody has the move "do something dangerous (that isn't another move) roll+dangerous" and it goes: On a 10+, choose 2. On a 7-9, choose 1:
* You do it properly.
* You avoid any circumstantial consequences.
* You avoid any trouble somebody else is trying to give you.

And then you have a Bruiser character who has the move "when you beat somebody up roll+dangerous" that goes like this: On a 10+, you beat them up how you want them beat up and no harm comes to you. On a 7-9, you beat them up but also choose 1:
* Things around you get smashed and broken.
* You get scuffed up too.
* You cause a real big commotion.

So not only is it more specific fiction-wise (the zoom in) but it's clearly better. If a guy pulls a gun on your character and you go to beat him up, on a 10+ with the generic move you could either a) get shot, b) see someone else get shot, or c) fail to beat him up properly. But if you are a Bruiser it's all good, it goes down exactly how you say it goes down. On a 7-9, with the generic move you can't even beat him up properly without getting shot, but if you're a Bruiser the worst that can happen to you is you get scuffed up (or maybe arrested if you cause a commotion).

Even somebody with the generic move and dangerous+2 is still not as good at beating people up as a Bruiser with dangerous+0 is.

Cool. I wrote up a bunch of science fantasy monsters, but I thought these ones could work for trad/other fantasy as well.

[Carnivorous Tree]

I made these monsters using the instructions in the rulebook, but if anybody has suggestions to make them better, fire away.

These two work together:

Carnivorous Tree
Huge, Reach, Solitary
20 HP
2 Armour
Sharp teeth (b[2d10]+5 damage) Reach

At first, it appears to be nothing more than an ordinary tree, but then one gets too close to it, and the tentacles reach out and the almost monkey-like heads begin to shriek and tear at whatever the tentacles bring near to it. The sounds it makes attract roaming packs of poisonous fur crabs, which eat the fruit and leaves of the carnivorous tree, thus helping it reproduce.

Instinct: To devour what moves.

*Appear to be a normal tree.
*Attract fur crab by screaming.
*Grab a foe in its tentacles.
*Retract roots and crawl slowly.

Fur Crab
Group
6 HP
1 Armour
Pincers (1d6+2 damage, 1 piercing) Close
Special Qualities: Poisonous flesh.

Resembling hairballs with legs and eyestalks, the fur crabs roam through plains and forests, grazing and foraging in small groups. They are especially fond of the fruit and leaves of carnivorous trees, but are extremely hostile to other mobile living things. They will defend their territory from all intruders, working as a group to drive them away. They will also gather in herds for protection, and for mating and rearing their young. Because their flesh is poisonous to eat, they have no natural predators except for parasites.

Instinct: To defend territory from moving creatures.

*Attack as a group.
*Gather into a herd.
*Grab foe with pincers.

Here's what Dr. Frankenstein does all day:

Creation of Mad Science
Construct, Solitary
16 HP
1 Armour
Weapon (1d10+2 damage, forceful) Close
Special Qualities: Made from disparate parts.

Created by mad science from the parts of others, the creation of mad science is a twisted, conflicted thing. What memories still swim within those once-dead limbs, what base urges linger in that recombined genetic code? This is science that has never been tested, never been prototyped, and can never be repeated. Each creation is unique.

Instinct: To struggle between true nature and following orders.

*Fly into a rage.
*Follow true nature of disparate parts.
*Grab a foe and strangle.
*Ignore injuries.
*Obey orders.
*Reveal buried memories.

And here's three animal-combo monsters:

Lobster-Mouse
Devious, Group, Stealthy, Tiny
6 HP
0 Armour
Burrowing tail (1d4 damage) Hand
Special Qualities: Parasite.

The lobster-mouse is a crafty predator, subsisting on tiny invertebrates until it encounters a large animal, which it then parasitizes. By burrowing its tail into the flesh of a host and contacting the nervous system, the lobster-mouse overrides the brain’s commands in place of its own, taking over the host’s body.

Instinct: To invade.

*Burrow into a creature’s flesh.
*Control a host’s actions.
*Drop from the ceiling.
*Scuttle away.

Maggot Wolf
Fast
6 HP
0 Armour
Bite (1d8 damage) Close

This ugly creature is most often seen in the company of depraved alien wizards, who use it as an attack dog. The maggot wolf stands as tall as a man when, instead of crawling along the ground, it rears up to attack with tooth and claw. Its slime is particularly hard to wash off.
(comes with a picture: it looks like a giant maggot with human arms and a hairless wolf's head)

Instinct: To obey the master's commands.

*Attack by surprise.
*Do tricks.
*Leave a trail of slime in its wake.

Scorpion-Pig
Large, Solitary, Terrifying
16 HP
3 Armour
Bite (1d10+1 damage) Close
Special Qualities: Metaspectrum vision, Poisonous stinger.   

The dreaded scorpion-pig stands motionless in the open for hours on end, until it picks a target. Then it charges and attacks mercilessly. Its pincers are surprisingly blunt, and only used to prod and poke—its teeth and poison stinger are the real threats.

Instinct: Attack! Attack! Attack!

*Charge a foe.
*Stab with poisoned stinger.
*Trample foe.

If the move says "You have any innate abilities and weaknesses of the form" then why does a druid in the form of an insect still see and hear like a human, and not like an insect? That doesn't really follow the fiction, unless you are playing a super-hero game.

"Now that you are a bug, this is what the world looks like to a bug."

Just turning into an animal to fly up somewhere doesn't seem all that powerful though. The fighter could just tear the building down and getting up somewhere ceases to be an issue. But if the point of the move is to, y'know, role-play a guy who turns into animals, then he should actually get the experience of turning into an animal, as opposed to just transforming his body like malleable clay and getting temporary super-powers.

Hey Vincent!

I don't use PMs like everyday or anything, but I do use them and I'd like to continue using them, but after 2 and a half years, mine is almost full! And it feels weird to just delete my conversations.

So, can we get a higher message limit? If at all possible?

kthxbye

David, here's what I think is going on. A part of your brain thinks this is a great idea. Another part of your brain thinks it's a dumb idea, and this second part of your brain has come to the forums for reinforcements because it is losing.

So here they are: This is a dumb idea because...

a) If they're picking important NPCs, they're telling you who they want to interact with, have scenes with, and actually see in the game. If you then pick another NPC and ask them to choose between them, what do you think they are going to say? "Oh, MC, you're so totally right, I'd much rather my mom live than my sister, what was I thinking?" No, they will say "I just told you I wanted my sister in the game, I don't know why you had to invent my mom just to kill her."

b) Usually we play role-playing games to actually, y'know, play them, not trade NPCs like baseball cards. So if the gator is gonna come and rampage the holding and kill people, play it out! Just deciding some characters to die doesn't really have any impact. When it's actually part of a scene you're playing, and the dice crap out on you and things go bad, and something unexpected happens and maybe somebody does really well and saves a whole bunch of people--that's the good shit right there.

You see? That part of your brain was right after all. Or at least I agree with it and I can make an argument in favour of it.

However, there does seem to be a way you could repurpose this idea.

Draw the holding on a big piece of paper. Then have the players pick an NPC that is important and YOU place them on the map. Now we know where all of them are. Then you pick an NPC that is important to each character and the PLAYERS place each of them on the map. Eight NPCs, all on the map. Then you bring out a little toy gator and have it rampage across the map! Where will it go? Who will be caught in it's devastating path of destruction? What will the PCs do, and will they be able to stop it before it gets to grandma's house?!?

Yeah, good points. The sound stuff does seem pretty fractured now that you mention it.

I was kinda thinking Purify Matter would also neutralize poisons, which the cleric move doesn't do, and function as a "create food" spell, so I put it at level 1, but I've already got Neutralize Organic Process, so maybe it's better off as a clone of Sanctify.

Maybe a magnetism/tractor beam automatic operation to pull objects into your hand a la the jedi trick?