Neonchameleon
Legend
I've been thinking about why I find Dungeon World so unsatisfying (and about the "Does System Matter" thread), and I've realise that it gives me very little of what I want out of either Dungeons & Dragons or a game Powered By The Apocalypse. It doesn't even come close to either the exploration or the tactics of Dungeons and Dragons - and isn't even in the same league as Apocalypse World for a character focused or even fast playing game. For that matter it struggles to match Apocalypse World for the exploration and tactics I normally go to Dungeons & Dragons for.
For exploration I find Dungeon World weaker than either D&D (any edition) or Apocalypse World. A fundamental driver of explorative D&D starts out with our young character going out into the wilderness and uncharted dungeon or sometimes wandering around a city - and they are new in town. But in D&D the dungeon exists before we ever get there. It's been mapped out (often illogically, but never mind) and exists independently of us, there to be explored. It is, in a sense, real. Dungeoncrawls, hexcrawls, pointcrawls - they all exist independently of the actions of the characters and the geography and even ecology is there to be explored. Apocalypse World by contrast gives you a default setting that isn't independent of the characters - but this makes perfect sense because the characters are movers and shakers in that setting. If someone's playing the Hardholder (town boss) stats of your home town are literally on the Hardholder's character sheet and issues facing the home town are rolled for at the start of the session based on the Hardholder's character sheet. The setting, despite the GM not having created it in advance is very real in part because it's an extension of the characters, created in character generation. Meanwhile Dungeon World explicitly has world/dungeon generation on the fly - but the playbooks, being D&D classes, are not grounded in the world and mechanically part of the world. So the dungeons and even the maps feel like they are less anchored in place and more being laid in front of the characters.
For tactics D&D has two things - battlemap play and resource/spell management. Dungeon World pretty obviously uses theatre of the mind so the battlemap tactics are minimised. And resource management is intentionally minimised through not necessarily expending spell slots and ammo rarely being spent. Further the loss of target numbers so you always need the same on your dice rolls to hit weaken Dungeon World's D&D style tactics still further. Meanwhile Apocalypse World tactics are all about choices; there are two basic moves you can use to shoot at someone with one being aimed shot and the other being covering fire to make them keep their head down - and three support moves of standing overwatch, keeping an eye out, and playing bait. After you roll for what you are doing there are significant choices on all the 7-9 and 10+ options (and even some on the 6-). So you have options doing different things and showing what you want and what you risk. By comparison Dungeon World has two attacking moves; one ranged and one melee (so it's not so much a choice as a thing) and one support move to defend an ally. And the truly damning part of Dungeon World is that on a 10+ when shooting someone or a 7-9 when hitting someone there aren't actually any choices.
And for character development Dungeon World misses the small and large stuff alike. Those options as to what to prioritise when doing things that were missing in the tactics? What you do and the choices you make are how you show who you are - and Dungeon World's options are by AW's standards sparse. But in addition to missing the important details it misses the meatiest part of character development in Apocalypse World. In Dungeon World your classes are basically D&D classes. In Apocalypse World your classes are your place in the world - whether it's the local town boss (hardholder), the biggest badass around (gunlugger), a creepy psychic (brainer), a cult leader (hocus), the local doc (angel), the person who runs the local scene (maestro d'), and more. And one of the biggest pieces of character development possible is to change your playbook - which can be done either through levelling up or "when life becomes untenable". This can give fundamental character growth and new consequences as the badass steps up to try to hold this town together and becomes a hardholder or renounces (most of) their guns to become a healer, or e.g. the hardholder can be shot and come back as a gunlugger, out for revenge - or the gunlugger can realise they got too close to death and can't do this any more and become an angel. Or far more; it's not pre-planned and can change from any playbook to any other. This represents mechanical weight and incentive on a huge level of character development, all the more important because it's not pre-planned and is foundational to who your character is and how they interact with the world. (No, this isn't D&D multiclassing; you don't stop being your old class in D&D (except arguably in the 3.X Paladin Falls To Blackguard).
Does Dungeon World have its advantages? I'll never say a D&D version with single page character sheets and a faster play speed and less prep is bad. And it's less ... opinionated ... than Apocalypse World and therefore much easier to get into for people who are used to D&D. But in all my experience it misses the highs of both.
For exploration I find Dungeon World weaker than either D&D (any edition) or Apocalypse World. A fundamental driver of explorative D&D starts out with our young character going out into the wilderness and uncharted dungeon or sometimes wandering around a city - and they are new in town. But in D&D the dungeon exists before we ever get there. It's been mapped out (often illogically, but never mind) and exists independently of us, there to be explored. It is, in a sense, real. Dungeoncrawls, hexcrawls, pointcrawls - they all exist independently of the actions of the characters and the geography and even ecology is there to be explored. Apocalypse World by contrast gives you a default setting that isn't independent of the characters - but this makes perfect sense because the characters are movers and shakers in that setting. If someone's playing the Hardholder (town boss) stats of your home town are literally on the Hardholder's character sheet and issues facing the home town are rolled for at the start of the session based on the Hardholder's character sheet. The setting, despite the GM not having created it in advance is very real in part because it's an extension of the characters, created in character generation. Meanwhile Dungeon World explicitly has world/dungeon generation on the fly - but the playbooks, being D&D classes, are not grounded in the world and mechanically part of the world. So the dungeons and even the maps feel like they are less anchored in place and more being laid in front of the characters.
For tactics D&D has two things - battlemap play and resource/spell management. Dungeon World pretty obviously uses theatre of the mind so the battlemap tactics are minimised. And resource management is intentionally minimised through not necessarily expending spell slots and ammo rarely being spent. Further the loss of target numbers so you always need the same on your dice rolls to hit weaken Dungeon World's D&D style tactics still further. Meanwhile Apocalypse World tactics are all about choices; there are two basic moves you can use to shoot at someone with one being aimed shot and the other being covering fire to make them keep their head down - and three support moves of standing overwatch, keeping an eye out, and playing bait. After you roll for what you are doing there are significant choices on all the 7-9 and 10+ options (and even some on the 6-). So you have options doing different things and showing what you want and what you risk. By comparison Dungeon World has two attacking moves; one ranged and one melee (so it's not so much a choice as a thing) and one support move to defend an ally. And the truly damning part of Dungeon World is that on a 10+ when shooting someone or a 7-9 when hitting someone there aren't actually any choices.
And for character development Dungeon World misses the small and large stuff alike. Those options as to what to prioritise when doing things that were missing in the tactics? What you do and the choices you make are how you show who you are - and Dungeon World's options are by AW's standards sparse. But in addition to missing the important details it misses the meatiest part of character development in Apocalypse World. In Dungeon World your classes are basically D&D classes. In Apocalypse World your classes are your place in the world - whether it's the local town boss (hardholder), the biggest badass around (gunlugger), a creepy psychic (brainer), a cult leader (hocus), the local doc (angel), the person who runs the local scene (maestro d'), and more. And one of the biggest pieces of character development possible is to change your playbook - which can be done either through levelling up or "when life becomes untenable". This can give fundamental character growth and new consequences as the badass steps up to try to hold this town together and becomes a hardholder or renounces (most of) their guns to become a healer, or e.g. the hardholder can be shot and come back as a gunlugger, out for revenge - or the gunlugger can realise they got too close to death and can't do this any more and become an angel. Or far more; it's not pre-planned and can change from any playbook to any other. This represents mechanical weight and incentive on a huge level of character development, all the more important because it's not pre-planned and is foundational to who your character is and how they interact with the world. (No, this isn't D&D multiclassing; you don't stop being your old class in D&D (except arguably in the 3.X Paladin Falls To Blackguard).
Does Dungeon World have its advantages? I'll never say a D&D version with single page character sheets and a faster play speed and less prep is bad. And it's less ... opinionated ... than Apocalypse World and therefore much easier to get into for people who are used to D&D. But in all my experience it misses the highs of both.
