Recurring silly comment about Apocalypse World and similar RPGs

[Faolyn]

You are talking past me.

How?

 

[Lanefan]

Of course it can be. My games have lots of talky moments like that and it's great. But "conversation," in this context, doesn't mean the PCs are just hanging around and shooting the breeze; it means the players are figuring out what's going on, deciding where they're going next, and making plans.

There's usually a time crunch of some sort of in games. The bad guys are planning something; they're not just sitting around in their 10x10 rooms guarding chests and waiting for the PCs to come slaughter them. The volcano is going to erupt or the planar rift is going or the evil horde is going to reach the city. The PCs need to be walking and talking at the same time; they don't have the time needed to firm up friendships or tell stories. It's why a lot of games--and not just PbtA games--use countdowns. Things are happening in the background and are going to happen whether or not the PCs are doing anything about it.

Maybe that's what pushes me away from this style of game somewhat: as a player I want there to be times when I/my character can relax, goof around, and take it easy; to counterbalance those times when tensions are high and manure's getting real. I'm at the table to relax and kick back, not to get stressed out.

And sure, countdowns are fine if used in moderation. For example, this one mission might have a real time crunch "shut down the ritual within 24 hours or the planar gate to all hellfire will open"; but then IMO the next mission should be way more relaxed "Yeah, there's Giants been raiding the northlands; it's fall now and they've packed it in for the winter, but if you could take 'em out before raiding season starts next spring we'd sure appreciate it".

That, and (depending on the character I'm playing) I can sometimes be the sort of player who goes "Fine, let the bad stuff happen; and when it does, how can we turn it to our benefit?"

There's still plenty of time for talky moments. Say the PCs are aware that there's monsters gathering at The Lich's Tower, but the PCs are two days' ride from there. They're probably not going to be able to ride for two days straight, so they have to stop during the night to rest. They can talk about the campfire. But, it's also probably not a great idea for them to have heart-to-hearts when they're actually in The Lich's Tower and there's monsters all around them that are trying to kill them.

I've seen this happen: characters having heart-to-hearts in the midst of great danger (often because one thinks either they or the other is about to die); and it can be great fun.

Also, it's those downtime-y talky moments when there's no tension that allow characters to get involved in non-adventuring things such as love affairs, pranks, and other fun things that IMO can only enhance a campaign.

 

[pemerton]

Let me ask this - What if the players do something that is not a move, that is they do not look to the GM to see what happens, but whatever they are doing doesn’t map to a move?

This is based on reading the games rather than actual play, so folks with more direct experience should correct me, but from that it strikes me that, if this happened, then the conversation would continue until a player made a move or the players looked to the GM to see what happens. But I also think that this would be play that would indicate poor play by the GM in terms of scene framing.

I agree with Citizen Mane except for the last sentence.

Eg, suppose that two players are discussing something among themselves, as their PCs. They don't need to look to the GM to see what happens next: they just talk to one another. I don't think this has to indicate poor play.

Of course the GM still has to pay attention, because if one of the players says something to the other that is an attempt to coerce by threats of violence, or to seduce or manipulate by the offer of something, or by a threat with no intention to actually hurt, then the GM should be superintending the resolution of that triggered move (Go Aggro or Secude/Manipulate).

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

You are talking past me.

I'm just putting the answer to the question, squarely answered as asked, to you. I guess all I can recommend is that reading the rules (I'd go with AW 2e, which is a fun game) will clear this up. I'm perfectly happy to answer specific rules questions that come up in the course of that, and I promise to do so in the most straightforward and helpful way possible.

 

[pemerton]

it’s not so much that they are needed, but if you don’t have them and this situation is not discussed in the rules then it would be very reasonable to read the AW rules and come to the conclusion that every action is a move.

So are you saying that you're read the rulebook, but missed the discussion and worked examples of this sort of thing?

 

[pemerton]

If they're not looking for the GM, that means they're playing amongst themselves and you don't need to do anything.

You know. Like in probably every RPG in existence.

Agreed. See also my reply just upthread, quoting @Citizen Mane: unlike some RPGs, "free roleplaying" between players can still trigger moves (especially Go Aggro and Seduce/Manipulate, maybe also Read a Person) and the GM has a special responsibility to superintend this.

 

[pemerton]

If there aren’t rules for this stuff then it’s reasonable to read AWs rules and come to the conclusion that the only way to play the game is to have all player actions be moves. One could even play the game that way after having read the rules.

So did you read the AW rules, miss the all the answers to the questions you're asking, and therefore reach the conclusion you describe here?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Maybe that's what pushes me away from this style of game somewhat: as a player I want there to be times when I/my character can relax, goof around, and take it easy; to counterbalance those times when tensions are high and manure's getting real. I'm at the table to relax and kick back, not to get stressed out.

And sure, countdowns are fine if used in moderation. For example, this one mission might have a real time crunch "shut down the ritual within 24 hours or the planar gate to all hellfire will open"; but then IMO the next mission should be way more relaxed "Yeah, there's Giants been raiding the northlands; it's fall now and they've packed it in for the winter, but if you could take 'em out before raiding season starts next spring we'd sure appreciate it".

That, and (depending on the character I'm playing) I can sometimes be the sort of player who goes "Fine, let the bad stuff happen; and when it does, how can we turn it to our benefit?"

It could depend on the exact PbtA game of course, but in AW and DW you can DEFINITELY run self-interested bastards. In fact I'd say almost ALL AW characters kind of have something like that as almost a default, its a hard world, filled with hard people. DW, well, evil is a choice of alignment for many playbooks... neutral for even more.

I've seen this happen: characters having heart-to-hearts in the midst of great danger (often because one thinks either they or the other is about to die); and it can be great fun.

Also, it's those downtime-y talky moments when there's no tension that allow characters to get involved in non-adventuring things such as love affairs, pranks, and other fun things that IMO can only enhance a campaign.

See, I don't think there's anything wrong with that, and DW for instance does have a sort of a 'town phase'. Its not super formal, but there are definitely down time moves, and I don't see why down time cannot include whatever other activities, that's really up to the participants. Nothing in PbtA really works against this, and while the game does focus on the 'exciting parts' there's absolutely nothing that says 1 adventure follows after another the next day. Characters could, fictionally, spend years doing other stuff between adventures. There just aren't rules for what that stuff is in most PbtA games I am familiar with. D&D and other systems don't generally have those sorts of rules either (I'm sure there's a game that is an exception somewhere, but it IS an exception).

 

[pemerton]

Apocalypse World doesn't feature "adventures" and so - as a corollary - doesn't feature "non-adventuring" time or things.

 

[Faolyn]

Maybe that's what pushes me away from this style of game somewhat: as a player I want there to be times when I/my character can relax, goof around, and take it easy; to counterbalance those times when tensions are high and manure's getting real. I'm at the table to relax and kick back, not to get stressed out.

And sure, countdowns are fine if used in moderation. For example, this one mission might have a real time crunch "shut down the ritual within 24 hours or the planar gate to all hellfire will open"; but then IMO the next mission should be way more relaxed "Yeah, there's Giants been raiding the northlands; it's fall now and they've packed it in for the winter, but if you could take 'em out before raiding season starts next spring we'd sure appreciate it".

Sure, you could do that. And that's fine. But when you get to the giant's lair, are they just going to be sitting around in their rooms waiting for the PCs to come slaughter them? Are none of them going to sound an alarm or even just cry out when the PCs kills them, thus alerting the rest of the giants as to the presence of intruders? For that matter, are they just doing nothing in their lair? IMO that's an incredibly boring way to play. Getting to the giant's lair can be as relaxed as you want, but actually moving around inside shouldn't be relaxed. The giants shouldn't be just saying "Huh, look, Bob's been killed. Oh well." By the time the PCs have killed two or four giants, the rest of the giants should be aware of their existence and fighting back.

That, and (depending on the character I'm playing) I can sometimes be the sort of player who goes "Fine, let the bad stuff happen; and when it does, how can we turn it to our benefit?"

OK? And you can do that just fine in PbtA as well. You choose to let the bad guys do their thing, fine. It just means that other events will happen that you may not be able to turn to your benefit.

Take the giants for instance. Maybe your bad guy decides to let them keep raiding, or wants to strike a deal with them. OK, cool. That just means there's going to be other things to be urgent about. Other adventuring groups who also want to stop the giants. One of the things the giants stole was an iron flask and they release a powerful demon or genie who has plans of their own. There's a volcano that's going to erupt that will affect your new giant allies and they're demanding you help them. While you're busy with your new giant friends, you're unaware of the flock of ice dragons that's just awakening.

I've seen this happen: characters having heart-to-hearts in the midst of great danger (often because one thinks either they or the other is about to die); and it can be great fun.

This doesn't have anything to do with PbtA, though. You can have a deep conversation while in the middle of combat, sure, and you can do it in both D&D and PbtA (and any other game as well). But that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a sense of urgency. If you decide to spend some time gazing soulfully into each other's eyes, that means you're probably not actually fighting or otherwise taking care of the bad guys. "Talking is a free action" can only get you so far, after all.