Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8632272" data-attributes="member: 82106">I think I probably absorbed this from you referring to it, and if I did read it probably because you posted it, master! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> What I recall is the analogy of PbtA to layers of an onion, such that as a design you could peel away the less essential 'outer parts' (which I take to be things like specific playbooks and details of specific moves) but you would still have the ESSENCE of the game. That appears to be surfaced in the link you give here as heading 4 "Apocalypse World's Structure" So, my statement in the previous post was reflective of "The innermost core is the structured conversation: you say what your characters do. The MC, following their agenda and principles, says what happens, and asks you what your characters do next." If you have this, then you have the 'essence' of the game. I mean, I'm not going to claim that all games which have this are PbtA, not at all. You could layer entirely different mechanical solutions on top of that core and have a completely different game. I'd say FitD games fall into that category, they're close kin to PbtA games, and basically share that core layer, but layers 2-4 have been engineered differently. I would maintain however that if you have that core, and the rest of the game 'collapses onto it' (which I take to mean ALWAYS builds on it exclusively) then the resemblance to AW will be there to some degree, and the resulting game will probably reflect at least some Story Now character.</blockquote>

Verification