I'd love to playtest the latest version of the rules, if you'd like to send them. I happen to have perfect timing for that at the moment. (Already pitched in for the finished work ;)

This is great, thanks a lot for putting it up!

This looks really nice! The playbooks make a great gallery of character types for a kind of fantasy game that would suit my taste, I especially like how much of the core mechanics are kept from AW proper.  Oh, and the Monster makes me all fuzzy and warm inside. :)

I'm currently making a simple hack for a more Burning Wheel or Game of Thrones style game. I might ask to borrow some of you stuff here, if that's okay.

I did this for a while, with two of us at the table. It was great fun.

I would suggest that you use the Hx move that concludes character creation at the outset of the game.  It gives just enough detail to create familiarity, but not so much as to be a rigid straight jacket. 

Also make sure you check out page 96, under "Say this Early and Often".  In that paragraph, it very clearly says that the players are required to play the characters as if they are real people.  Get this player to stop the inhuman monster concept and play someone a little more real. I think that saying no to a concept is a valid option, especially if it is going to result in a less than fun experience for all involved.

I heartily concur.

Once in my early days of AWing the two PCs went at each other's throats in the first session. It was a disaster, fun-wise. Since then I've taken the 'PCs should be allies' advice very seriously.

I haven't actually seen it in action, myself, but to me it looks pretty straightforward. It's more powerful against NPCs, obviously, since 1 or 2 harm is life-threatening to them, but I'd say generally that you want to use it to command people to do things they would rather accept than face incapacitation for refusing.

Don't forget that you can use the Read a person question "how can I get your character to..." to find out how far you can push your thralls.

Also, just to mention it, I can't take any credit for the move's design, since it is from the core Brainer playbook of AW proper.

Sounds cool! But I suggest you keep an open mind about the specifics of who he is, on a deeper level, so you can discover and connect with those things in-game!

So, make a new doc, put it in the shared folder, and write down your choices from the playbook's options. And shout out with any questions, either here or there!

Okay, nice. Thanks!

Is it still to come?

Un update about the Commander's gigs. You have your designated tasks (after all, that's what duty is about, right?), but they will change as soon as fictional circumstances make them.

Also, small changes to the gear. Advanced on laspistol was just a copy-paste error, for example.

This looks awesome! I've shared a folder for you in google docs now. Every doc in it will have the same sharing settings, so you don't need to share new docs when you make them and put them there. I hope you are okay with a first name basis, but if you prefer your forum alias, just change it in the doc.

I love your ideas about your characters and relations, but for the record I see specifics of what you have said here to be speculations about how it might be. Only what is on your sheets and what we see and state in-game becomes actual fact.

Soylent, of course it's okay to swap the adjectives! :) And, yeah, I prefer vulnerable: breakdowns for various reasons. For one, the hold economy in this case is so loose, I don't want to fiddle with it in that way, while the tag is something I know works well for this kind of stuff.

If you say you have jetpacks, I'm sure you do! But I would also assume that your 'mobile' means you have something like assault shuttles and troop transports under your direct command, on top of that. You know, for when jetpacks don't have the range covered.

Also, if you say your power armor is stealthy, I'm sure it is! I'd say it is still tagged with 'bulky' though, because of their size. If that's cool with you.

The way I think about breakdowns is that they are the consequence of you stuff not being maintained highly enough. Exactly what that means in your case is something I'm looking forward to finding out from you in play! :)

I agree about the tasks. Let's have you pick your tasks from time to time.

Good idea about the plasma pistol. Let's give it reload.

I say, let's have you write down your choices from your playbooks, even if Smeg is still undecided. I'm eager! As you can see I haven't made name lists, so pick something you like. And some titles you think are cool as well. I need a name for the ship as well, and your email addresses!

Right, good point. Thanks!

I changed the default vulnerability to supply crisis, and put in a high maintenance vulnerable: breakdowns instead.

I haven't seen duty in play, so all that with hold is a draft that we will try out (my own commander character hasn't had any downtime since he changed from trooper to commander!), so I guess we'll find out if will be unclear when we get there. I think it will work itself out, like spare parts for your broken down vehicles costing one hold, replenishing the ranks with recruits costing another, fresh base supplies another, and so on. Spending hold for bonuses would probably be about anything from parading your troops through the streets to impress the ruler you want to manipulate, to getting the advantage of having scouted out or otherwise preparing the area you enter in force.

There is something I know I want with commanding from the rear that isn't in your version, but I can't put my finger on it. I'll put your alternative in there as well, and keep thinking (and talking) about it. That allright? (These things usually work themselves out in actual play.)