Official RPG for Avatar: The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra announced

Greg K said:

I own both Monster of the Week (1e and 2e) and the playtest for the now defunct Midsummer. Both were improvements over DW, but something with them still doesn't sit right with with regards to PBTA. Also online discussions by fans of Monster of the Week and Monsterhearts (which I have seen) left me cold with the discussions of how PBTA games are focused and running a Buffy game required either choosing one or the other depending on the seasons of Buffy or having to switch between the two mid-campaign as the focus and tone of the campaign change.

Click to expand...

I'd ignore those discussions, personally. Frankly, Monsterhearts is a horrible fit for Buffy regardless of season. It's got a very Twilight-by-way-of-Anne-Rice thing going on that doesn't really match the vibe of Buffy in the slightest, even when the show approaches topics like sex and sexuality.

MotW 2.0 is notably improved over its predecessor IMO, and is a perfect fit for a Buffy style game.

In general, PbtA takes some getting used to; specifically, in learning to treat Moves not as specific actions or powers you have, but rather the mechanisms for resolving the thing your character is trying to do.

Eilathen said:

I'm glad Avatar finally sees the light of day as an rpg. That being said, I'm sad that it didn't go to Cortex Prime. I have nothing against PbtA (I like it quite a bit, actually), but count me in amongst those who question the fit of this style of rpg for Avatar.

Click to expand...

FWIW a Dragon Prince RPG has been announced using Cortex.

IndigoTraveler said:

So what are the issues with the PBTA system and how does it play?

Click to expand...

PbtA attempts to demystify the traditional RPG process with a set of simple and clear rules. Most of the issues I have seen are from experienced RPGers who see this as being unnecessary (as they already know the process) and too structured (as matters that are often left to vague guidelines and suggestions are worded as clear step by step instructions). Despite this, in practice, neither of these really bear out as PbtA actually runs almost identical to a traditional RPG. However, the change in presentation can present a hurdle to some. On the flipside, PbtA's approach actually makes it great for RPGers with little to no experience as they can follow the rulebook with little guesswork.

Another issue that I sometimes see is that PbtA RPGs have a high narrative focus. The fiction is given its own weight. As such, the mechanics are often lighter than a traditional games as it is expected that something established in the game will be respected and incorporated by all players when they narrate further. For example, if a PC is injured, then there may not be a lot of rules imposing the exact mechanical impact of the injury. Instead, the group is expected to apply the rules from that point taken the injury into account. If the PC needs to walk a distance, then the GM may activate a move such as Endure Harm, that the GM may not have called for with a healthy PC. This can take some getting used to as it has a narrative rather than physics perspective, but it generally has the result of lightening the rules considerable and keeping the focus on narrative, which seems a good fit for Avatar.

In my experience, PbtA plays great. As a player, you get good niche protection in terms of abilities and story and clear set of cool crunchy powers. As a GM, you have a lot of discretion and a lot less rules, which allows you to run things more easily on the fly and incorporate the PC choices and actions more readily in the game, engaging the players as their PCs get a ton of spotlighting.

It also has a strong "yes but" core to its rules, which means that the PCs will generally succeed at what they set their mind too, but often at a cost. The success helps the players feel engaged and the cost helps keep the story moving forward in interesting ways. Its a great system to encourage players to embrace complication as a way to more interesting RPing.

There is a quickstart for the Root RPG, another licenced RPG that Magpie are doing, on DTRPG here: Root: The Pellenicky Glade Quickstart - Magpie Games | Root: The Tabletop Roleplaying Game | DriveThruRPG.com. The rules are likely to be very different and much expanded in terms of explanation, but it may give you insight into what things may look like from a high level.

Skywalker said:

In my experience, PbtA plays great. As a player, you get good niche protection in terms of abilities and story and clear set of cool crunchy powers. As a GM, you have a lot of discretion and a lot less rules, which allows you to run things more easily on the fly and incorporate the PC choices and actions more readily in the game, engaging the players as their PCs get a ton of spotlighting.

Click to expand...

Yeah I have one PBTA rpg called Henshin and I was confused as there's no dice rolling or even dice type mentioned. So I was confused if I needed the Apocalypse World book, ala dnd's player handbook, to see how stats, xp, and all that were supposed to work in a PBTA rpg.

Legacy: Life Among the Ruins 2nd Edition is the one I'm mostly interested in.

IndigoTraveler said:

Yeah I have one PBTA rpg called Henshin and I was confused as there's no dice rolling or even dice type mentioned. So I was confused if I needed the Apocalypse World book, ala dnd's player handbook, to see how stats, xp, and all that were supposed to work in a PBTA rpg.

Legacy: Life Among the Ruins 2nd Edition is the one I'm mostly interested in.

Click to expand...

No. All PbtA RPGs should be self contained. As said, PbtA is more a design approach than a core rule system like Savage Worlds, so they differ quite a bit from each other. Sounds like an issue with Henshin, which I haven't heard of.

Legacy is great but its a tough first PbtA RPG as it also adds a organisational level of play that can take a lot to get used to.

Edit: Looking at the DTRPG blurb for Henshin shows that its a diceless variant. Most PbtA RPGs use 2d6.

Skywalker said:

PbtA

Click to expand...

I don't believe this is confirmed; only speculated.

Hopefully I can get to play Appa.

More seriously, I was sort of hoping Fandom was going to get the license so we could have official Dragon Prince and Avatar crossovers using Cortex.

But I like what Magpie has done released to date; so I'm probably in at some point.

Eyes of Nine said:

I don't believe this is confirmed; only speculated.

Click to expand...

As posted above, it’s been confirmed by Magpie on Facebook.

Magpie posted this on Facebook today: Our team is still developing the game, but it will feature the Powered by the Apocalypse system like Masks: A New Generation, Urban Shadows, and Epyllion. We're excited!

Dicebreaker did an interview with Mark Diaz Truman and James Mendez Hodes, who revealed some early details about the game as well as their thoughts on the design process so far.

Tonguez said:

What rules system is being used?, didnt see it on my (admittedly quick) glance over

Click to expand...

PBTA, Powered By the Apocalyse; synonymous with AWE, or Apocalypse World Engine.

These core elements dominate the AWE/PBTA commonality
1. Playbooks. Archetypes rendered in a 2-4 page booklet
2. Moves: only specific actions are mechanically presented, and are on theme. Usually, each playbook has at least one the others don't.
3. a singular difficulty and 3 potential outcomes on it (≤6="fail", 7-9= Success+Complication, ≥10= Success); most used 2d6+Skill.
Another uses 2×(1d10+skill), each vs (IIRC) 7+, neither hitting is fail, one hitting is complicated success, 2 hitting success.
4. Low GM input (but not low GM impact!)

Jeff Carpenter said:

Is PbtA easy for younger gamers both to play and to GM?

Click to expand...

Play? probably. Players narrate until they do something the GM (or the other players) think is a move; if you want to make a move, you are, by the rules, required to narrate the triggering action, not state the move.

The GM's role is to declare things moves, to narrate on behalf of NPCs, and to stir the pot when things get slow. How much this requires is variable by which game. Some are almost entirely responsive - only player actions introduce new things; others are more traditional. The hardest part varies.
In looking at AW itself, the hardest part for experienced GMs is the hands off approach, and for players is that they are expected to generate the story by their own narrations and even PVP.

Jeff Carpenter said:

Someone above said it can be tiring on the GM, but ive never played it.

Click to expand...

I've only played one game that's part of the PBTA approach, and it's far enough out that many don't acknowledge it as such... Sentinel Comics. I've bought a couple, and read a bunch more...
It's not any more tiring to run than most other modern games. It's also on the more traditional side; Everyone gets a turn in the round, the GM runs NPCs, GM creates 2-5 encounters for an issue, which make a plot, and players resolve the encounter however their powers and creativity apply.