Last night on ... WORLDS IN PERIL ...
Tagging in Robert Bohl to talk about prep in AW games.
Our protagonists, the Catalysts ... are changing the world.
Last week: They built a moon base. That is, the scientist of the group used the create move to build a moon base. They have matter teleportation, which made it a lot easier: they needed either to harness and destroy the AI they had, or to build a next generation space suit. ("Yeah, no problem, but ... "). They decided to build it using next-gen space suits, so found scientists to help.
That is, most of last session was spent at Carnegie Mellon University recruiting a post doc in robotics to work for them.
This week: They got a message from the UN, as building a base on the moon makes them pirates. On the moon.
They met with Neil Degras Tyson, a UN subcommitte chaired by a racist Aussie, and -- later that day -- Obama. They offered everyone the same thing: unlimited food. And they'd like to be recognized as a sovereign country. On the moon.
Our most common move is Fit-in -- and yet, the players have so few bonds. There was also a take-down against The Corrupt Status Quo -- my PCs are fighting the change the world, and are fighting against monied interests.
So, Robert Bohl -- prep? Two months ago, I figured out some fronts. That is, when i had high energy, I thought about direction and what would happen if the PCs do nothing. Some of that has changed, but its mostly the same. I've created a front or two in the last few months, but mostly this game runs on improv and no prep.
Ask questions, and I'll try to answer them. And maybe someone will come along and tell me I'm doing it wrong. And maybe I am. :-)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Every game should include Neil deGrasse Tyson.
ReplyDeleteI forgot one detail: The UN asked them to bring the flag back. The one Neil and Buzz aldrin left. They ask Neil deGrasse Tyson, who says absolutely not.
ReplyDeleteWhen they mention this to Obama later on, he asks for the name of the person responsible. Then signals to two secret service guys. They leave. I know why. :-)
I don't know WiP; it may not have the things in it that make Apocalypse World difficult for me to MC. So I'll just address my questions and comments as though we're talking about AW.
ReplyDeleteSo this was all driven by obvious things that need to happen in the story? How much of that is the system helping you, and how much of that is the players (including you) injecting their enthusiasm and making it work?
As an extreme counter-example, with Montsegur 1244, I never have to wonder what happens next. I'm given that stuff, and so are the players, and by playing we agree to play toward those moments. As a less-extreme counter-example, early on in playtesting Misspent Youth, I found it very difficult because I was always asking players what they wanted to do next. I was pushing a boulder uphill. I changed my system so that players had to create scene elements and then that wasn't a problem anymore.
I'll also note that it's nice that what you're describing works, but if I remember the rules of AW properly, you're supposed to create 3-6 Fronts. So if you're not actually supposed to, then I need to hack the rules, which means (in this case, not in every case of hacking) there's a problem for me with the game that I need to fix in order to make the game playable.
> So this was all driven by obvious things that need to happen in the story?
ReplyDeleteWell, yes and no. Hard and soft moves both came up. At one point, I looked through my notes for the Mastermind sitting behind the Corrupt Status Quo front, and found some moves they could use. I used one of these when a player wasn't concerned about taking damage -- so they all got hurt. That is: the player decision to not take harm when dealing it, the front, and the fictional positioning all helped determine the most likely move to make, and how to do so.
And let me be clear: My players are awesome. The characters have clear goals, and take the initiative. That's part of why they are so easy to GM. And two of them run AW games. So, I am ridiculously lucky to have such players.
So, good players. But, also, I'm finally figured out how to combine moves in ways that make narrative sense. I sucked at this two years ago -- it takes practice.
As for number of fronts: there are at least three active. As they stop paying attention to one, it gets worse. They (probably?) can't stop all of them. I actually need to put together a new one.
See, I'm not satisfied with that "it took me two years to figure it out" part. I want the game to tell me what to do and to be able to do it reliably within a half dozen sessions.
ReplyDeleteRobert Bohl I think the third gen games make it a lot easier. AW proper is ... hard.
ReplyDeleteI've heard that a lot, that the other PbtA games are far more procedural.
ReplyDeleteThey benefit from a variety of perspectives, I think. Different styles and different authors giving their take, and getting to something thats easier for a broader audience.
ReplyDeleteMaybe. I'm thinking of how simplified Monster Hearts seems in comparision, and how Urban Shadows seems easier to understand without being procedural per say. At least not in any way I understand that word. :-)
There were some pieces of aw that many people found to be more confusing then they had to be and we're cleared up in other hacks. Like hx, or the harm clock.
ReplyDeleteDavid Rothfeder Yeah. First time I ran AW, I didn't explain the harm clock well. Two players assumed there should be 12 segments, and marked it as such. That was ... weird.
ReplyDeleteOh, Robert Bohl , I thought of something: The best way to learn to run AW is to play AW and watch the GM.
ReplyDeleteWilliam Nichols - That's what I usually do, and I tried to here, but the MC side of the system is pretty opaque to the players.
ReplyDeleteOther than 'make your move but don't say it's name' I felt the Mc side of things is pretty open to the players (well maybe not the front sheet but I don't use that). I think the solution is Tha William Nichols needs to run a Web campaign for Robert Bohl and myself.
ReplyDeleteRobert Bohl Where are you? I know I see you at Nerdly, so my baseline assumption is DC. Is that right?
ReplyDeleteDavid Rothfeder I think you just volunteered. Maybe a play by post? Who else would you like to invite to your new online game?
ReplyDeleteI have trouble getting into play by post, but hangouts works well. I just need to wait a week or so until I find out what my new schedule is. As far as more players, Adam McConnaughey and Mischa Krilov might have interest
ReplyDeleteMisha B expressed interest in PbP. Which has the advantage of asynchronosity; we don't have to solve the scheduling problem. Which is basically unsolveable if I'm involved. :-)
ReplyDeleteDavid Rothfeder - I strongly disagree that the system is open from the MC side to the players.
ReplyDeleteI find the MC moves opaque to the MC, let's start with that. But:
* When an MC does something, you don't know what move she's using, and there's no way to, unless she states aloud what it is
* Threats and fronts are secret
* Harm seems to me to often a bit of a make-it-up-on-the-spot thing, as well
* Make your move, but misdirect
* Announce future badness (but this is maybe just a function of threats and fronts being secret)
* Respond with fuckery and intermittent rewards (maybe; to be honest, I don't understand this)
* Custom moves are often secret
I formed the idea that the system is opaque to learning through watching by being MCed by Vincent in our home series (though it's continued to be the case when I'm MCed by others). When we played, I tried to learn it from him by watching him and asking him questions, but it wasn't clear to me (and it even irritated one of the people we were playing with, who interpreted my questions as being lobbying for my character to always get to win).
I should note, I almost always have a lot of fun as a player in AW (though I'd prefer, as a player, if the system had better spotlight management).
William Nichols - I'm in Brooklyn.
I'd be happy to try an online game. I love playing it, as I said, and I want to learn.
I've never run AW proper and my style of running MH is far more 'seat of my pants' than anything else. I'd love to get a better look under the hood so to speak.
ReplyDeleteRobert Bohl do i remember that you love star wars?
ReplyDeleteI do! Even the prequels.
ReplyDeleteI could do worse than to do Star Wars World, then. This hack stays fairly close, with the changes that are made being really important to get the theme right. I'm making up a few custom playbooks for it, even. And a first session worksheet.
ReplyDeleteIf we did this, I'd think three threads would be important: actual play, discussion about the play, and an under the hood thread to discuss moves.
Is this a thing people would have emotional and time energy for?
I should be able to do a play by post, yeah.
ReplyDeleteDo you want to setup a community for it?
ReplyDeleteMisha B Soon.
ReplyDeleteFirst, how many interested players are there? Robert is essential, and sounds like I've got Misha B . I'll let other people have some time to weigh in before figuring out how to make a G+ community.
I guess I can give it a try, but play by post and star wars games are not things that I'm generally attracted to. That said, good gaming is good gaming.
ReplyDeleteBecause I like him: Tony Lower-Basch any interest in playing in a play by post PBtA game using Star Wars World playbooks?
ReplyDeleteI love playing with Tony!
ReplyDeleteWhitney D?
ReplyDeletePaging Whitney Delaglio
ReplyDeleteWilliam Nichols: Sure thing! I'd love to get my Star Wars groove on.
ReplyDeleteRobert Bohl: I love playing with you too, man! I still, to this day, treasure the memory of your not-so-evil minion in MLwM.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if my brain can handle pbp right now.
ReplyDeleteCorrection: all three of your players run PbtA games, not just two of them.
ReplyDeleteMy apologies to Davey!
ReplyDeleteHe is all up ons the Dungeon World!
ReplyDelete