Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Help Me Get "Apocalypse World" and PbtA games in general.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8704402" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>I'm going to post some thoughts about an aspect of game design and play execution that may (or may not...TBD) reveal some daylight between myself and other posters in this thread:</p><p></p><p><strong>GM QUANTITATIVE BUDGET</strong> - This value reflects the amount of opposition a GM can bring to bear against the goals of the players in a given situation, scene, or phase of play. In some games, this opposition isn't just a product of GM Budget, but also integrated with various resource economies and demands upon those economies (eg - turns and danger/threats related to both the manifestation of those turns + the accretion of those turns + player-decision points around those turns including spending other resources in their dealings with turns/dangers/threats).</p><p></p><p>So what are examples of some of the most "pure" (lets say) GM Budget-driven games?</p><p></p><p><em>4e D&D</em> (XP budget for combat encounters + Skill Challenge win/loss con and attendant DCs and meta-resources)</p><p></p><p><em>Cortex+ FH </em>or <em>MHRP </em>(Dice pool/resource budgets, stress budgets for their threats, and extra-scene budget in the way of Doom Pool)</p><p></p><p><em>Torchbearer </em>(Adventure size budgets, conflict budgets, procedures and Camp and Town costs on the player-side that drive opposition constraints)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Quantitative budgets and related procedures are one way of constraining GM opposition that can be brought to bear against the goals of players in situations, scenes, or phases of play.</p><p></p><p>Another way is the AW or PBtA/FitD route. Instead of budgets and budget-related procedures (although we do have some of those in the Harm and Recovery mechanics, Barter/lifestyle/Working Gigs, Hx, intra-move mechanics, and Threat Clocks...in FitD we have a whole lot more of integrated budgets), we have clarity and codification of agenda + principles + table-facing procedures + premise.</p><p></p><p>We've covered agenda, principles, table-facing procedures so I'm going to focus on premise (not just what it is, but how we arrive at it during play, and how it works with the rest of the game to constrain opposition) as I think this might be an area of slight disagreement around the periphery.</p><p></p><p>* AW has 3 character-specific premise components that should find their way heavily into play (and not incidentally): <strong>Highlighted stats, Hx track, playbook-specific xp</strong>.</p><p></p><p>* AW also has character-unrelated aspects. No matter who you are, you can't escape the <strong>apocalyptica</strong>. This manifests in:</p><p></p><p>(a) the<strong> psychic maelstrom</strong> (its existence and its implication including its <strong>Ψ-Harm</strong>)</p><p></p><p>(b) the particular brand of "daunting/dangerous brokenness" of this world which are the <strong>Threat </strong>archetypes (<strong>Warlords, Grotesques, Afflictions, Brutes, Landscapes, Terrain, Vehicles</strong>)</p><p></p><p>(c) the Sword of Damocles of<strong> scarcity and deprivation </strong>which the pressure point that the <strong>Lifestyle/Barter/Working Gigs</strong> procedures inflict upon us (what you need to do to maintain at all...what you're willing to<strong> lower yourself</strong> to or <strong>risk </strong>in order <strong>to merely maintain</strong>) and<strong> D-Harm</strong> (which can manifest at the character level...but often manifests at the <strong>population level</strong> - another pressure point...dealing with the implications of the prospect of <strong>scarcity and deprivation at scale</strong>).</p><p></p><p>[HR][/HR]</p><p></p><p>AW gets around the GM Fiat orientation of "dealer's choice" that propels much of the traditional play space by:</p><p></p><p>* Making everything table-facing.</p><p></p><p>* Making procedures/moves and their results mandate. There is no opt-out by the participants at the table (MC among them).</p><p></p><p>* Making those bolded things above always and ever central to play. Yeah, we might be meandering and digressing and reflecting for a moment here and there or when we're trying to build-out a situation...but sooner (not later), something_will_happen (whether its procedures like Lifestyle/Barter/Working Gigs or a Threat acting offscreen or a GM framing a charged situation via a Threat or a GM provoking with charged framing or a GM prompting with ambiguous framing and a player aggressively making a move to orient and charge the situation.</p><p></p><p>* The nature of the conversation (particularly asking provocative questions and using the answers + GM "be a fan of characters" orientation) + both the potency and breadth of player moves in orienting situation framing or re-framing present situation (in D&D parlance...its like every AW player is <em>playing a Wizard</em>).</p><p></p><p></p><p>These things all integrate to create a (lets call it) "Budget By Proxy." We know when a situation is opened and we know when its resolved and we know the orientation of its resolution (escalation or de-escalation or complication along a different axis). We know when a Threat is viable and vital and we know when its been resolved (when its "gone boom" or been eliminated or gone away). This doesn't happen in the quantitative way of the budgets of games like 4e or Cortex+ MHRP/FR or TB, but we know it by the integration of all of the stuff above.</p><p></p><p>And we also know that the occult influence of the psychic maelstrom and scarcity and deprivation are built into the foundation of play...and their proverbial budget is limitless...there is no escape...they_are_never_going_away (like The Grind in Torchbearer). Even then though...contrast the scarcity and deprivation procedures and mechanics of Lifestyle/Barter/Working Gigs and those of interacting with the psychic maelstrom and The Grind in TB and their consistent implication and application and upon play (not just on fiction but on gamestate and decisions related to both) with GM-facing mechanics and "Dealer's Call" GM-facing principles of Trad games that govern both singular threats and, especially, persistent threats. Its a totally different ball of wax.</p><p></p><p>I hope this draws a good contrast for AW with both Trad, "Big GM" games and other Story Now or Step On Up games that are based on GM Quantitative Budget constraints.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>TLDR </strong>- AW doesn't manage GM Budget Constraint by way of Quantitative Budget Constraints (a la 4e, Cortex+ MHRP/FH, TB) but because of the intersection of (a) how table-facing the game is + (b) how constraining the agenda and principles and procedures are (they aren't opt-out by anyone at the table, MC especially) + (c) how much clarity there is around premise/reward cycles + (d) the reality that everyone is <em>playing a D&D Wizard</em> (with potent and vast situation orienting, situation framing, and situation reframing capability).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 8704402, member: 6696971"] I'm going to post some thoughts about an aspect of game design and play execution that may (or may not...TBD) reveal some daylight between myself and other posters in this thread: [B]GM QUANTITATIVE BUDGET[/B] - This value reflects the amount of opposition a GM can bring to bear against the goals of the players in a given situation, scene, or phase of play. In some games, this opposition isn't just a product of GM Budget, but also integrated with various resource economies and demands upon those economies (eg - turns and danger/threats related to both the manifestation of those turns + the accretion of those turns + player-decision points around those turns including spending other resources in their dealings with turns/dangers/threats). So what are examples of some of the most "pure" (lets say) GM Budget-driven games? [I]4e D&D[/I] (XP budget for combat encounters + Skill Challenge win/loss con and attendant DCs and meta-resources) [I]Cortex+ FH [/I]or [I]MHRP [/I](Dice pool/resource budgets, stress budgets for their threats, and extra-scene budget in the way of Doom Pool) [I]Torchbearer [/I](Adventure size budgets, conflict budgets, procedures and Camp and Town costs on the player-side that drive opposition constraints) Quantitative budgets and related procedures are one way of constraining GM opposition that can be brought to bear against the goals of players in situations, scenes, or phases of play. Another way is the AW or PBtA/FitD route. Instead of budgets and budget-related procedures (although we do have some of those in the Harm and Recovery mechanics, Barter/lifestyle/Working Gigs, Hx, intra-move mechanics, and Threat Clocks...in FitD we have a whole lot more of integrated budgets), we have clarity and codification of agenda + principles + table-facing procedures + premise. We've covered agenda, principles, table-facing procedures so I'm going to focus on premise (not just what it is, but how we arrive at it during play, and how it works with the rest of the game to constrain opposition) as I think this might be an area of slight disagreement around the periphery. * AW has 3 character-specific premise components that should find their way heavily into play (and not incidentally): [B]Highlighted stats, Hx track, playbook-specific xp[/B]. * AW also has character-unrelated aspects. No matter who you are, you can't escape the [B]apocalyptica[/B]. This manifests in: (a) the[B] psychic maelstrom[/B] (its existence and its implication including its [B]Ψ-Harm[/B]) (b) the particular brand of "daunting/dangerous brokenness" of this world which are the [B]Threat [/B]archetypes ([B]Warlords, Grotesques, Afflictions, Brutes, Landscapes, Terrain, Vehicles[/B]) (c) the Sword of Damocles of[B] scarcity and deprivation [/B]which the pressure point that the [B]Lifestyle/Barter/Working Gigs[/B] procedures inflict upon us (what you need to do to maintain at all...what you're willing to[B] lower yourself[/B] to or [B]risk [/B]in order [B]to merely maintain[/B]) and[B] D-Harm[/B] (which can manifest at the character level...but often manifests at the [B]population level[/B] - another pressure point...dealing with the implications of the prospect of [B]scarcity and deprivation at scale[/B]). [HR][/HR] AW gets around the GM Fiat orientation of "dealer's choice" that propels much of the traditional play space by: * Making everything table-facing. * Making procedures/moves and their results mandate. There is no opt-out by the participants at the table (MC among them). * Making those bolded things above always and ever central to play. Yeah, we might be meandering and digressing and reflecting for a moment here and there or when we're trying to build-out a situation...but sooner (not later), something_will_happen (whether its procedures like Lifestyle/Barter/Working Gigs or a Threat acting offscreen or a GM framing a charged situation via a Threat or a GM provoking with charged framing or a GM prompting with ambiguous framing and a player aggressively making a move to orient and charge the situation. * The nature of the conversation (particularly asking provocative questions and using the answers + GM "be a fan of characters" orientation) + both the potency and breadth of player moves in orienting situation framing or re-framing present situation (in D&D parlance...its like every AW player is [I]playing a Wizard[/I]). These things all integrate to create a (lets call it) "Budget By Proxy." We know when a situation is opened and we know when its resolved and we know the orientation of its resolution (escalation or de-escalation or complication along a different axis). We know when a Threat is viable and vital and we know when its been resolved (when its "gone boom" or been eliminated or gone away). This doesn't happen in the quantitative way of the budgets of games like 4e or Cortex+ MHRP/FR or TB, but we know it by the integration of all of the stuff above. And we also know that the occult influence of the psychic maelstrom and scarcity and deprivation are built into the foundation of play...and their proverbial budget is limitless...there is no escape...they_are_never_going_away (like The Grind in Torchbearer). Even then though...contrast the scarcity and deprivation procedures and mechanics of Lifestyle/Barter/Working Gigs and those of interacting with the psychic maelstrom and The Grind in TB and their consistent implication and application and upon play (not just on fiction but on gamestate and decisions related to both) with GM-facing mechanics and "Dealer's Call" GM-facing principles of Trad games that govern both singular threats and, especially, persistent threats. Its a totally different ball of wax. I hope this draws a good contrast for AW with both Trad, "Big GM" games and other Story Now or Step On Up games that are based on GM Quantitative Budget constraints. [B]TLDR [/B]- AW doesn't manage GM Budget Constraint by way of Quantitative Budget Constraints (a la 4e, Cortex+ MHRP/FH, TB) but because of the intersection of (a) how table-facing the game is + (b) how constraining the agenda and principles and procedures are (they aren't opt-out by anyone at the table, MC especially) + (c) how much clarity there is around premise/reward cycles + (d) the reality that everyone is [I]playing a D&D Wizard[/I] (with potent and vast situation orienting, situation framing, and situation reframing capability). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Help Me Get "Apocalypse World" and PbtA games in general.
Top