Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Apocalypse World / Re: Alternative Hack for AW2 Seize by Force
« Last post by Paul T. on Today at 09:12:07 PM »
Indeed. I haven't had an opportunity to run AW myself since we started this conversation, but it's been on my mind nevertheless. I was mainly wondering if there was an option in the move that never sees use, and therefore could simply be discarded, simplifying it further.

It also occurs to me that making the move somewhat-similar-but-still-distinct for NPCs and PCs may be slightly misleading. In the same way that Hx and help/hinder, as well as seduce/manipulate and a few others, work differently for PC vs. NPC use, we could probably design an even better version if we weren't trying to make them similar to each other. But that's a whole other topic!

2
Apocalypse World / Re: Alternative Hack for AW2 Seize by Force
« Last post by Ebok on November 17, 2017, 06:30:39 AM »
It goes well, sure.

Honestly the hard rolls haven't been a main focus lately, and it's been more hit or miss, so there aren't too many standout partials. So no great examples. The one that have occurred using this hack felt perfectly natural to the scenes. It's just once choice after-all, colored by the fiction. I honestly don't even think about it anymore, it's always been obvious which choice the NPC chooses, even to the players.

If you want to see how it goes, try it yourself.
3
Apocalypse World / Re: Alternative Hack for AW2 Seize by Force
« Last post by Paul T. on November 14, 2017, 11:06:56 PM »
Ebok,

Just posting here for an update. Things have been going well, I take it?

How often do you use the "NPCs choose" option on the move? Do you have any rule of thumb for when to use it and when not to?

How do you decide which options to choose? Is it based on "what the NPC prioritizes", story concerns, or something else?

Cheers!
4
Apocalypse World / Re: Seize by force - to kill
« Last post by Ebok on November 13, 2017, 08:09:11 AM »
( I have been, there isn't much to say other then the players love it, and it's only helped in a real way make a 10+ feel like a 10+. )
5
Apocalypse World / Re: Seize by force - to kill
« Last post by Paul T. on November 13, 2017, 04:23:02 AM »
Also, by the way:

Ebok, this latest phrasing of how you're handling "in battle" is the best and cleanest yet! That's a really clear and easy-to-follow formulation. Makes sense to me! You may consider our early discussion finally settled.

(If by any chance you've been playing and using your Seize by Force hack, I invite you to post about your experiences in the appropriate thread.)
6
Apocalypse World / Re: Seize by force - to kill
« Last post by hobbesque on November 12, 2017, 10:10:58 PM »
Paul T wins the "that sounds like what I meant, but better" award. The only thing I'd add is that you can zoom out and abstract the action, or not; you've got all these specific questions you can ask and moves you can use if you want, but you don't have to. maybe Dog head and his boyz are a bunch of gnats whose immediate future is being a greasy spot in the dust, if that's what the PCs choose, and fighting them is just a single seize by force move. If not, if it's more interesting or more real, you have total authority as MC to zoom in on the action more than that.

Wrt to seizing someone's "life," I agree generally about not seizing abstractions, but I remember the 1st edition thing being "their meat," which is what I assumed that people meant when they were saying "life." I wouldn't tell a player "no, never!" if they asked to seize Dremmer's life, I'd just do like I'd do if they asked a question for read a sitch that's not on the list, and direct them to what I think they mean.

If you seize so-and-so, and take definite hold, you've got them in your hands and at your mercy. If you say you waste them, well, inflict harm as established (on top of whatever seizing dealt). I wouldn't mess around with their success, their definite hold, by making the act under fire to inflict more harm (that sounds indefinite -- although they did not seize an escape route, so post-wasting I may ask them to do any number of things). If the fiction says it shouldn't be that easy to waste Dog head, then that should be established before seizing Dog head is a move that gets rolled.

Wrt to lay down fire: I'm also not sure 100% of the time I'd let an opportune shot pick out single NPC, again, all depending. I haven't played a lot with the battle moves yet, but when I have, I think what I'm gravitating towards is that in the chaos of a fight with a dozen+ people, there's some set-up before you can pick out just one person (at which point, maybe seize, maybe sucker, maybe go aggro, etc., depending). I've made the PCs act under fire most commonly, or use one of the subterfuge moves, or have their friend use one of the battle moves that lets them move and act freely, etc.
7
Apocalypse World / Re: Seize by force - to kill
« Last post by Alex_P on November 12, 2017, 08:10:32 PM »
My general outlook:
1. Fictional positioning is everything.
2. Don't roll abstract concepts like "someone's life" into "seize by force."

If you want to seize someone in a battle, you're seizing them bodily. Then you can off them because they're helpless.

Or maybe you can't grab them bodily, from where you're standing, so first you need to use seize by force (or act under fire, &c.) to establish that.

If you're just trying to snipe someone, imo, perhaps a better move is lay down fire. Establish that you've got a good vantage, then "take an opportune shot, inflicting harm (but -1harm) on an enemy within your reach."
8
brainstorming & development / Re: Cyber_Peripherals
« Last post by cromlyngames on November 12, 2017, 06:50:38 PM »
Heh, your waffle is great feedback and has made the other stuff better. That's not something to get sick of:)

I should probably post Piratey Planets here too at some point...
9
Apocalypse World / Re: Seize by force - to kill
« Last post by Paul T. on November 12, 2017, 06:25:50 PM »
I agree that the first edition's example of "seizing their life by force" was somewhat misleading. I know what Vincent was going for, I think - he likes using colourful figurative language to get an idea across in very few words - but here it's not being helpful.

To me, the key to playing AW (and related games) is to remain solidly fixed *in the fiction*. Abstracting the rules and moves will (not always, but often) lead to strange dilemmas like these. Think of the fiction first, not the other way around, and keep getting clarifying details until it makes sense.

Instead of looking at the rule and trying to ponder how it maps to the fiction, always get some more details about what's happening, and then engage the rules. THAT, for me, almost always resolves the difficulty, particularly with this move.

So, what does it mean to 'seize someone's life'? I don't know, and I don't care.

What I want to know, instead, is:

* What is your character doing?

* Where are they standing? Where is the enemy? How are they moving?

* How exactly are they going about it, and what are they going to do about _________?

Instead of dealing with an abstraction like "seizing someone's life", now you're dealing with a tangible outcome, like "I rush forward, and I want to get him in a headlock", or maybe "So you're just running into the open, screaming, and throwing that grenade? You're going to have to get past the bikers, though, to get close enough..."

Now we can fruitfully decide which move to engage and how the move's outcomes map to what happens next.

Treating "you take definite hold" as a placeholder for "you achieve a tactical objective you were going for" will usually work. The other options are generally easy enough to parse, although "dismay or frighten" may sometimes require more clarification, as well.

For example, in the first example, above, clearly that option will tell us whether you manage to get your arms around Dremmer's throat, or not. There's no difficulty knowing what that means, right? We can all picture it, we know what's happening "on-screen", and the ambiguities of trying to parse what "seizing someone's life" are left behind in the dust.
10
Apocalypse World / Re: Seize by force - to kill
« Last post by Ebok on November 11, 2017, 10:06:04 PM »
I basically follow a new rule for my battles. Every time I'm allowed to speak, it's a hard move. So, yeah it doesn't matter if they hit or miss, whats matters is how many complications are in the field and what are they all going to do next.

In both of your options, you keep saying I seize his life by force. This is how first edition seize by force was handled, but I don't think it's necessary. If you captured their leader in a big old gun fight, I'm not sure that he is automatically helpless. Just that you have him definitely. If you want to kill him an he's helpless, and the gang tries to stop you... I think you could have your gang defend this position by force, and if they succeed and take casualties or whatever, you have the time then to do what you need to do with the boss. If he is helpless shoot him. If he isn't then fight him. If you want words, have them. etc.

The most important thing isn't that the moves handle the same every time, but that the fiction's logic took priority. If you could do this, then you can try to do it with a roll if one is needed. But also remember, if you could not do it like this, they can't just say they do it anyway. They have to fight scratch and claw their way to it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10