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: 9201313" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>But again, the distinction here is that the PC is unleashing actual violence. The NPC has an option to 'cave', in which case harm is avoided, but it is distinct from manipulate/seduce, which covers a whole RANGE of approaches which all share the concept that the PC has some sort of leverage on the target and a threat/promise/action is exchanged for desired behavior by the NPC. Go Aggro is pure violence, You raise your fist with the full intention of bringing it smashing down on the guy's face, that's Go Aggro. 10+ the guy buckles and you achieve your intent. Now, if the intent is simply to KILL HIM, then there's a DIFFERENT MOVE, called 'In Battle' which is just simply a fight to the death where each side attempts to kill the other. Now, you could kinda kludge together Go Aggro perhaps by going into battle, and then stopping short of slaughter after a round or two, but why? Effectively Apocalypse World is about violence and chaos, so going in aggressive is a big part of play. Giving it a move is a game design choice that reliably allows the action to focus on that sort of situation in a quite natural and pretty realistic way. I mean, most people are not interested in fights to the death! It would be hard and risky to reliably produce that kind of interaction out of very discrete task-focused moves. This is part of Baker's point, put the tools in the game that make the game do what it is supposed to do, to be about what it is actually about. Don't pussy-foot around making up naturalistic action rules, focus on character and situation and allow things to play out in the terms of the game's agenda.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification