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: 8702496" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>I would say if there is daylight between on us on Apocalypse World its the bolded.</p><p></p><p>The A Few More Things To Do on p93 (121 if you're looking at AW1) and The First Session on 96 - 104 discusses these things. You're:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">probing and prodding to see if they'll be provoked to make a move (and take the lead).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">wondering and wandering aloud and together.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">digressing and seeing where that goes (does someone pick it up a detail and run with it, charging a situation?).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">focusing on worthwhile ephemera for subsequent play to feature (like maps).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">asking questions but saving the answers for later (basically surveilling and taking mental notes that may turn into Threats).</li> </ul><p></p><p>There is elaborate intel gathering and subtle encouraging of folks to, effectively, make their own kickers organically as you play. Its certainly within the scope of play of AW. Its effectively the Info Gathering/Free Play portion of Blades that orients and nails down subsequent play (its just that you don't shift to a new phase of scene-based play like in Blades' Scores...you just enter charged situations and make moves that snowball until the situation resolves which leads to new content > rinse/repeat). EDIT - I think this is probably as good as any way to think about the loop of AW where we go from "not-conflict charged" to "conflict charged." Its like the IG/FP portion of Blades (not-conflict charged) where we're meandering around Duskvol/Crew interests until we make some moves or frame some scenes and settle in on where our conflict will be tonight (and then move to a conflict-charged Score). Its just that this happens without a "phase-shift" like in Blades.</p><p></p><p>I would say the other disagreement is probably around what constitutes "GM fiat" and "blocking" here. In my mind, GM fiat is contingent upon a measure of anarchy or opacity or lack of codification of constraining agenda and principles such that a GM is making situation framing, consequence, win con/loss con decisions in a vacuum or based on some massively zoomed out and amorphous ethic (like "fun"). Jonathon Harper's diagrams are helpful here (if you remember them). GM fiat is basically the inverse of best practice constrained and principally constrained GMing. Best practices and principles that effectively amount to "find the fun" are neither constraining nor particularly guiding in any meaningful way; they're basically "GM feel (exclusive) constrained." If no one can articulate the process (because its all "feel"), you're almost certainly <em>there</em>. It becomes compounded (or perhaps <em>revealed</em>) when play becomes increasingly unmoored to and unmediated by "system's say."</p><p></p><p>Hence, why I don't think GM fiat is applicable here with AW.</p><p></p><p>"Blocking" is a another (more complex imo) subject. It intersects with the above, but its also system dependent. Apocalypse World grants the GM significant framing and zoom leeway and responsibility. However, at the same time, the agenda + principles + conversation structure + move structure both lets and encourages players to immediately wrest control of situation from the GM and effectively NOPE it into another direction. Grabbing a piece of situation and focusing on it via conversation and/or answering a question purposefully in a particular way and/or Working Gigs (and filling out the Gig-space and resolving) and/or dealing with Barter stuff and/or Reading a Sitch/Person and/or Opening Up Brain and nail down the topic gives players huge "kicker" or player fiat capacity to wrest control of trajectory of play before we even get to playbook-specific stuff.</p><p></p><p>So if we have a situation that doesn't feel particularly charged or it feels like the zoom isn't where the player wants it to be or the player feels like their "block-ish meter is going off" (lets say) because of any of that...well, the players can aggressively change the zoom or "charge the situation" or alter the orientation of the unfolding situation toward a desired bent by overt conversation or by making moves. The game is designed to basically allow player-authored kickers to just emerge organically through play (from handling lifestyle at the opening of the session to Working Gigs to making moves in order to create situation framing to making moves or engaging in overt conversation to orient or reorient framing or charge a situation that isn't sufficiently charged to their liking).</p><p></p><p>[HR][/HR]</p><p></p><p>Outside of that, I definitely agree that you can GM Apocalypse World better or worse from one session to the next (same goes for playing it). I'm just not sure "fiat" and "blocking" are the things that come to mind. The things that come to mind for me are things like:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Not knowing the rules</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Crappy or dynamism-challenged apocalyptica (from threat handling to scarcity vs abundance to stat/relationship/playbook stuff)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Leading an uninteresting conversation (provocative situations, interesting decision-space, consequences-space that compels and haunts)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Not being good at following players leads and handing off situation authority to them as they step up</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Not being curious enough or aggressive/bold enough or disciplined enough (or all 4 simultaneously)</li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 8702496, member: 6696971"] I would say if there is daylight between on us on Apocalypse World its the bolded. The A Few More Things To Do on p93 (121 if you're looking at AW1) and The First Session on 96 - 104 discusses these things. You're: [LIST] [*]probing and prodding to see if they'll be provoked to make a move (and take the lead). [*]wondering and wandering aloud and together. [*]digressing and seeing where that goes (does someone pick it up a detail and run with it, charging a situation?). [*]focusing on worthwhile ephemera for subsequent play to feature (like maps). [*]asking questions but saving the answers for later (basically surveilling and taking mental notes that may turn into Threats). [/LIST] There is elaborate intel gathering and subtle encouraging of folks to, effectively, make their own kickers organically as you play. Its certainly within the scope of play of AW. Its effectively the Info Gathering/Free Play portion of Blades that orients and nails down subsequent play (its just that you don't shift to a new phase of scene-based play like in Blades' Scores...you just enter charged situations and make moves that snowball until the situation resolves which leads to new content > rinse/repeat). EDIT - I think this is probably as good as any way to think about the loop of AW where we go from "not-conflict charged" to "conflict charged." Its like the IG/FP portion of Blades (not-conflict charged) where we're meandering around Duskvol/Crew interests until we make some moves or frame some scenes and settle in on where our conflict will be tonight (and then move to a conflict-charged Score). Its just that this happens without a "phase-shift" like in Blades. I would say the other disagreement is probably around what constitutes "GM fiat" and "blocking" here. In my mind, GM fiat is contingent upon a measure of anarchy or opacity or lack of codification of constraining agenda and principles such that a GM is making situation framing, consequence, win con/loss con decisions in a vacuum or based on some massively zoomed out and amorphous ethic (like "fun"). Jonathon Harper's diagrams are helpful here (if you remember them). GM fiat is basically the inverse of best practice constrained and principally constrained GMing. Best practices and principles that effectively amount to "find the fun" are neither constraining nor particularly guiding in any meaningful way; they're basically "GM feel (exclusive) constrained." If no one can articulate the process (because its all "feel"), you're almost certainly [I]there[/I]. It becomes compounded (or perhaps [I]revealed[/I]) when play becomes increasingly unmoored to and unmediated by "system's say." Hence, why I don't think GM fiat is applicable here with AW. "Blocking" is a another (more complex imo) subject. It intersects with the above, but its also system dependent. Apocalypse World grants the GM significant framing and zoom leeway and responsibility. However, at the same time, the agenda + principles + conversation structure + move structure both lets and encourages players to immediately wrest control of situation from the GM and effectively NOPE it into another direction. Grabbing a piece of situation and focusing on it via conversation and/or answering a question purposefully in a particular way and/or Working Gigs (and filling out the Gig-space and resolving) and/or dealing with Barter stuff and/or Reading a Sitch/Person and/or Opening Up Brain and nail down the topic gives players huge "kicker" or player fiat capacity to wrest control of trajectory of play before we even get to playbook-specific stuff. So if we have a situation that doesn't feel particularly charged or it feels like the zoom isn't where the player wants it to be or the player feels like their "block-ish meter is going off" (lets say) because of any of that...well, the players can aggressively change the zoom or "charge the situation" or alter the orientation of the unfolding situation toward a desired bent by overt conversation or by making moves. The game is designed to basically allow player-authored kickers to just emerge organically through play (from handling lifestyle at the opening of the session to Working Gigs to making moves in order to create situation framing to making moves or engaging in overt conversation to orient or reorient framing or charge a situation that isn't sufficiently charged to their liking). [HR][/HR] Outside of that, I definitely agree that you can GM Apocalypse World better or worse from one session to the next (same goes for playing it). I'm just not sure "fiat" and "blocking" are the things that come to mind. The things that come to mind for me are things like: [LIST] [*]Not knowing the rules [*]Crappy or dynamism-challenged apocalyptica (from threat handling to scarcity vs abundance to stat/relationship/playbook stuff) [*]Leading an uninteresting conversation (provocative situations, interesting decision-space, consequences-space that compels and haunts) [*]Not being good at following players leads and handing off situation authority to them as they step up [*]Not being curious enough or aggressive/bold enough or disciplined enough (or all 4 simultaneously) [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Help Me Get "Apocalypse World" and PbtA games in general.
Top