NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 7060366" data-attributes="member: 16586">[MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION],I think there are some substantive differences in approach, especially when we consider elements that are unique to the system, rather than just the GMing techniques. <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">When MCing player intent never enters the picture and character intent seldom does. The Apocalypse World cares about what you do, not what you want.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Apocalypse World utilizes task resolution rather than conflict resolution for the most part.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The way moves tend to snowball resembles fail forward in effect, but differs in application.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> If you do it, you do it means that when a move applies you must roll the dice and accept the result. There is no saying yes or saying no. Always say what the rules demand.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">There is no stake setting. You follow the fiction and make a move that fits. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Prep has a say in a way it does not in Burning Wheel and Cortex+ where it is all in potentia. Always say what your prep demands. It's a very particular sort of prep with room for gaps though.</li> </ul>When I'm running Apocalypse World, Monsterhearts, or Masks I tend to follow things pretty strictly. Dungeon World is looser in its demands. When I adopt their techniques to other games I tend to focus on the more transferrable principles and adopt them to the game. If I ever find anyone willing to play Burning Wheel I'm probably going to run it fairly strict. It's a lot easier to print off some playbooks, grab some people, and get gaming in 5 minutes.</blockquote>

Verification