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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Drifting games, genre limitations, and fruitful voids
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 8941854" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>[USER=78752]@DMZ2112[/USER]</p><p></p><p>In relation to our question about <em>what counts as a move</em> (say with reference to the Gunlugger example), Vincent Baker answers it at great length in the chapter on Advanced F****ry, and in brief on p 281 of that chapter: <em>All moves take the form “when __, then __.” </em></p><p></p><p>The "then" can be making a roll, changing a roll, adding or changing tags (like the Gunlugger who is Not to be Messed With), etc.</p><p></p><p>On the issue of "what's allowed", I think Justin Alexander is wrong (at least, just taking those tweets at face value) and I think it's not just about "not adjudicating mundane minutiae". I don't even quite agree with [USER=71235]@niklinna[/USER] that it's to do with what is or isn't "relevant to the tension demanded by the genre".</p><p></p><p>It's about <em>shaping the conversation</em>, ie the back-and-forth between players and GM about what is happening to and about the PCs. When a player declares an action for their PC that <em>doesn't</em> trigger a player-side move, the GM's job is to respond by making a move of their own - typically a soft move unless the player hands them an opportunity on a plate (eg by ignoring the threat/set-up of an earlier soft move). The effect of this will be to build up the tension - to extend the rising action. The situation around the PCs is getting more and more charged!</p><p></p><p>The effect of the player rolling the dice for a basic move is to resolve that tension - either on a 6- (the GM resolves it by making a hard move, thus changing things irrevocably for the worse) or a 10+ (the player gets to resolve it irrevocably for the better). A 7 to 9, speaking at a level of abstraction, continues to step up the tension.</p><p></p><p>There are exceptions: a 10+ on a "Read" action doesn't typically resolve things - it just allows the player to ask more questions and hence to set more parameters around the tension that is growing. Opening Your Brain is similar. This fits with the general them of AW that matters are only resolved by getting people to do what you want (Go Aggro, Seduce/Manipulate), or else either getting them out of your way (Seize by Force), or getting out of their way (Acting Under Fire).</p><p></p><p>Adding new basic moves doesn't change what actions anyone can declare. But it might change how those action can figure in the way the "story" of the PCs involves build-up and release of tension. To elaborate this point, consider how Vincent Baker opens his extended example of play (p 152):</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Marie the brainer goes looking for Isle, to visit grief upon her, and finds her eating canned peaches on the roof of the car shed with her brother Mill and her lover Plover (all NPCs).</p><p></p><p>There is no basic move <em>When you go looking for someone</em> or even <em>Whey you go looking for someone to visit grief upon them</em> - and so this is a completely legitimate action declaration by Marie's player, but it doesn't trigger a basic move. It just has the GM make a soft move in reply: here, the GM <em>provides an opportunity</em> to Marie's player (ie the opportunity to interact with Isle), though with at least a hint of a cost (because there are other people there who might want to get in the way).</p><p></p><p>If there was basic moves like the one I've described, then Marie's player would be potentially shaping the fiction in different ways by choosing to have Marie go looking for Isle. This would change the "flavour"/theme of the game, reducing its focus on interpersonal conflict and increasing its focus on investigation as such as a context in which conflicts reach their resolution.</p><p></p><p>(Btw, if you're interest in a thread about 18 months ago I imagined how things might unfold if the GM made a different sort of move in response to Marie's player's action declaration: <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8415668" target="_blank">thoughts on Apocalypse World?</a>, <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8416456" target="_blank">thoughts on Apocalypse World?</a>, <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8416728" target="_blank">thoughts on Apocalypse World?</a>, <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8417612" target="_blank">thoughts on Apocalypse World?</a> and <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8417673" target="_blank">thoughts on Apocalypse World?</a>.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8941854, member: 42582"] [USER=78752]@DMZ2112[/USER] In relation to our question about [i]what counts as a move[/i] (say with reference to the Gunlugger example), Vincent Baker answers it at great length in the chapter on Advanced F****ry, and in brief on p 281 of that chapter: [i]All moves take the form “when __, then __.” [/i] The "then" can be making a roll, changing a roll, adding or changing tags (like the Gunlugger who is Not to be Messed With), etc. On the issue of "what's allowed", I think Justin Alexander is wrong (at least, just taking those tweets at face value) and I think it's not just about "not adjudicating mundane minutiae". I don't even quite agree with [USER=71235]@niklinna[/USER] that it's to do with what is or isn't "relevant to the tension demanded by the genre". It's about [i]shaping the conversation[/i], ie the back-and-forth between players and GM about what is happening to and about the PCs. When a player declares an action for their PC that [i]doesn't[/i] trigger a player-side move, the GM's job is to respond by making a move of their own - typically a soft move unless the player hands them an opportunity on a plate (eg by ignoring the threat/set-up of an earlier soft move). The effect of this will be to build up the tension - to extend the rising action. The situation around the PCs is getting more and more charged! The effect of the player rolling the dice for a basic move is to resolve that tension - either on a 6- (the GM resolves it by making a hard move, thus changing things irrevocably for the worse) or a 10+ (the player gets to resolve it irrevocably for the better). A 7 to 9, speaking at a level of abstraction, continues to step up the tension. There are exceptions: a 10+ on a "Read" action doesn't typically resolve things - it just allows the player to ask more questions and hence to set more parameters around the tension that is growing. Opening Your Brain is similar. This fits with the general them of AW that matters are only resolved by getting people to do what you want (Go Aggro, Seduce/Manipulate), or else either getting them out of your way (Seize by Force), or getting out of their way (Acting Under Fire). Adding new basic moves doesn't change what actions anyone can declare. But it might change how those action can figure in the way the "story" of the PCs involves build-up and release of tension. To elaborate this point, consider how Vincent Baker opens his extended example of play (p 152): [indent]Marie the brainer goes looking for Isle, to visit grief upon her, and finds her eating canned peaches on the roof of the car shed with her brother Mill and her lover Plover (all NPCs).[/indent] There is no basic move [i]When you go looking for someone[/i] or even [i]Whey you go looking for someone to visit grief upon them[/i] - and so this is a completely legitimate action declaration by Marie's player, but it doesn't trigger a basic move. It just has the GM make a soft move in reply: here, the GM [i]provides an opportunity[/i] to Marie's player (ie the opportunity to interact with Isle), though with at least a hint of a cost (because there are other people there who might want to get in the way). If there was basic moves like the one I've described, then Marie's player would be potentially shaping the fiction in different ways by choosing to have Marie go looking for Isle. This would change the "flavour"/theme of the game, reducing its focus on interpersonal conflict and increasing its focus on investigation as such as a context in which conflicts reach their resolution. (Btw, if you're interest in a thread about 18 months ago I imagined how things might unfold if the GM made a different sort of move in response to Marie's player's action declaration: [URL="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8415668"]thoughts on Apocalypse World?[/URL], [URL="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8416456"]thoughts on Apocalypse World?[/URL], [URL="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8416728"]thoughts on Apocalypse World?[/URL], [URL="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8417612"]thoughts on Apocalypse World?[/URL] and [URL="https://www.enworld.org/threads/thoughts-on-apocalypse-world.682898/post-8417673"]thoughts on Apocalypse World?[/URL].) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Drifting games, genre limitations, and fruitful voids
Top