Search results

Very interesting question! Before I'm able to answer I just want to make sure we're both reading the diagram in a similar way and I'm understanding you correctly. The diagram is like an onion, right? At the center (its core): the conversation. Closer to its surface, playbooks, character moves...

I'm gonna push back just a tiny bit on this particular issue. We're not fully disagreeing, but not fully agreeing either: I'm not gonna speak about how Dungeon World thinks about this. Different game, possibly different goals. I think there is some oversight in suggesting that Vincent wrote...

You've said it perfectly.

I’m ready to move on too! I do have one request to make of you @Reynard, given that you are the agenda setter of the conversation and the one leading us through the different topics you want to explore to “get” Apocalypse World and PbtA. As we move forward, please recognize that there are...

I think it's a little unfair that I've somehow been shunned out of a conversation I thought I was contributing to in good faith. :(

Once again, I am definitely NOT, saying this is true of ALL PbtA games, some do ask you to set up stakes, some do ask you to think of goals. I wouldn't dare try some of these in, say, Avatar Legends. When it comes to Apocalypse World, though, its underlying model of implicit conflict allows...

Ah! One more, for a more traditional way of GMing the first session: We've just finished Character Creation and are about to start our first session of Apocalypse World. The following are the first few words coming out of the MC's mouth in fiction: "Rubik's, tell me, on a work day like this...

Apocalypse World poses a situation where there is pressure from the get-go. Your playbook is filled with pressures of different kinds. Character creation puts us at the door of impending action. Your environment is also filled with pressures of different kinds. They might or might not be...

Yeah, I totally get that! In all my readings of Vincent, it has become apparent that his insights on how roleplaying should work (for this particular game) are deeply codified into the game's rules themselves...to the point where you are almost inevitably going to have to contend with those...

With regard to the harm move: 134. Suffer Harm Move Vincent says in the comments: I want the decision whether to use it to rest on the MC's unconscious processes, not for it to require conscious deliberation every time.

You can, but you don't have to, it really depends. What do the rules of the game tell us?: whenever it's your turn to speak, make a move. Your moves are based on your principles. Your principles help you pursue your Agendas. Which Agenda will you pursue when making this decision? Will you...

Understood! From now on, I will not address any of my comments to you with the expectation of a direct response. You continue to be a part of this thread though, and you are still posting imprecisions about AW, so I will continue to quote you to counter them. Not to you, but for the benefit of...

Can you give me some examples of what you mean when you say “questions of clarity”? What are some contexts you would expect to hear those types of questions?

Absolutely, you and I are seeing eye-to-eye here. The conversation IS the game’s core structure. There’s nothing beyond it. (BTW, I’m new to Enworld but a long time lurker of these discussions, and I must say I’m big fan of yours hehe. Pemertonian Scene Framing for 4E was a huge boon to me and...

My position remains that the GM is authorized to make any move with regards to the state to the door whenever is their turn to say something. Their turn is whenever players look at them to see what happens, roll or not.

Can you please provide evidence for your statement?