Recurring silly comment about Apocalypse World and similar RPGs

[Old Fezziwig]

Yeah, basically. These kinds of games intentionally limit GM authority, and rather drastically at that. Given the prevelance of traditional gaming styles, a lot of folks are not going to be comfortable with this, and those who are would IMO be better served accepting that their enjoyment of these games is not shared by a lot of the folks in this community and people who don't like storygames often have a hard time expressing that in a way that doesn't come off badly.

And of course, that's just one aspect of these sorts of games with which a traditional gamer might have a problem.

That's a lot of words to say "we don't like your types around here" and "know your place."

 

[Faolyn]

A recurring thing I see said is that, in Apocalypse World, players can't declare actions that are not covered by a move.

This is just silly.

The rules are clear: if a player's declared action for their PC is a move, then the rules of the move are invoked ("If you do it, you do it"). Otherwise, if everyone looks to the GM to see what happens, the GM makes a move. This will be a soft move unless the player's declared action hands the GM an opportunity on a platter, in which case the GM can make as hard and direct a move as they like.

It puzzles me that this seems so hard for some RPGers to understand.

Because "if you do it, you do it" is not actually all that clear. It doesn't actually tell you how to do it. And I'd wager a lot of PbtA games just happen with the GM handing the players the playbooks to look through (since it's not like they need to look through lists of skills or spells or whatever) and with a list of what the player moves do, not with the players reading the book.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's a lot of words to say "we don't like your types around here" and "know your place."

If you say so. I was thinking more like, "be respectful of other people's feelings" and "just because something sounds insulting to you doesn't mean it was intended that way".

 

[pemerton]

Because "if you do it, you do it" is not actually all that clear. It doesn't actually tell you how to do it.

Well, the AW rulebooks says "If you do it, you do it, so make with the dice!" (I'm going from memory, so that is probably a tight paraphrase rather than a perfect quote.)

That is, if you declare an action that constitutes the fictional trigger for a move, then the dice have to be rolled and the participants at the table have to apply the rules associated with the move in question.

The contrast is with "say 'yes' or roll the dice" (which is found in DitV and Burning Wheel, among other reasonably well-known RPGs), or with "say 'yes', say 'no', or roll the dice" which is found in D&D 5e and many other trad-ish RPGs.

 

[schneeland]

Given the prevelance of traditional gaming styles, a lot of folks are not going to be comfortable with this, and those who are would IMO be better served accepting that their enjoyment of these games is not shared by a lot of the folks in this community and people who don't like storygames often have a hard time expressing that in a way that doesn't come off badly.

I tend to say it goes both ways. Sometimes the misunderstanding is genuine because the step outside the familiar paradigm is too far for that person. But similarly, it would be both more polite and productive to accept that other people can be passionate about play styles and design paradigms that oneself does not find appealing at all.

But basically, @Arilyn already gave a very good list of suggestions, of which I want to particularly support point 2:

2. Understand the difference between, "I don't like this game and this game is broken."

 

[Aldarc]

Because "if you do it, you do it" is not actually all that clear. It doesn't actually tell you how to do it. And I'd wager a lot of PbtA games just happen with the GM handing the players the playbooks to look through (since it's not like they need to look through lists of skills or spells or whatever) and with a list of what the player moves do, not with the players reading the book.

This is accurate IME.

 

[John Lloyd1]

Well, the AW rulebooks says "If you do it, you do it, so make with the dice!" (I'm going from memory, so that is probably a tight paraphrase rather than a perfect quote.)

That is, if you declare an action that constitutes the fictional trigger for a move, then the dice have to be rolled and the participants at the table have to apply the rules associated with the move in question.

The contrast is with "say 'yes' or roll the dice" (which is found in DitV and Burning Wheel, among other reasonably well-known RPGs), or with "say 'yes', say 'no', or roll the dice" which is found in D&D 5e and many other trad-ish RPGs.

I suspect the AW writing style is infectious, but without context the phrase 'if you do it, you do it' doesn't lead me to the process you have just described.

I'm interested in PbtA games, so I have Dungeon World on order from my LFGS. (I know it may not be the best example, but I am also interested in what it says about fronts).

 

[Faolyn]

Well, the AW rulebooks says "If you do it, you do it, so make with the dice!" (I'm going from memory, so that is probably a tight paraphrase rather than a perfect quote.)

That is, if you declare an action that constitutes the fictional trigger for a move, then the dice have to be rolled and the participants at the table have to apply the rules associated with the move in question.

The contrast is with "say 'yes' or roll the dice" (which is found in DitV and Burning Wheel, among other reasonably well-known RPGs), or with "say 'yes', say 'no', or roll the dice" which is found in D&D 5e and many other trad-ish RPGs.

That's not what I mean, however. I'm talking about the vagueness of "if you do it, do it." It would have been much easier to understand, I believe, if it had been explained like: "If you want your character to do something, just tell the GM what it is. Roleplay your character's actions and words. If what you're roleplaying would trigger one of your moves or one of the basic moves, then roll the dice. Otherwise, don't worry about it--you don't have to roll just because you want your character to do something." And then have a paragraph that describes what triggering a move means.

But "If you do it, you do it" is short and catchy. And as a result, you get tons of would-be players who have no idea what that means and tons of experienced players quoting that line as if it's holy writ and--all too often, in my experience--looking down on all the would-be players who don't get it.

 

[Faolyn]

I suspect the AW writing style is infectious, but without context the phrase 'if you do it, you do it' doesn't lead me to the process you have just described.

I'm interested in PbtA games, so I have Dungeon World on order from my LFGS. (I know it may not be the best example, but I am also interested in what it says about fronts).

I've not heard that many good things about Dungeon World. Or rather from what I've heard, it's too much D&D and not enough PbtA. That may be fine for your needs, however.

 

[John Lloyd1]

I've not heard that many good things about Dungeon World. Or rather from what I've heard, it's too much D&D and not enough PbtA. That may be fine for your needs, however.

Having already ordered DW, are the use of fronts widely used in other PbtA games?