[Apocalypse World] What's wrong with this and how might I fix it?

[Graham W]

Second session, tonight, with changes in the group: Steve, the hardholder, and Wai Kien, the hocus, couldn't make it. Replacing them we got Adrian, a driver, and Sean, a savvyhead.

(Hey, Vincent. We need to know how you sort out Hx when someone joins the game late.)

We'd left the last session with a battle starting: my front, N19, was invading the hardholding. So that's how we started, with a battle, using the battle rules.

The rules held together: we went strictly round the table, taking turns in order. It didn't break. The biggest problem was that people would describe what their guy was doing. It would involve attacking, say, the gang members at the back entrance. Now, should they do harm to the gang or to a guy?

Looking back, I think it should have been to the gang: there's rules for a guy attacking a gang (they attack at -2 harm). If they can't do any harm, because they'd only do 2 harm anyway, they just attack for narrative effect: for example, they stop the gang occupying the church, but they don't inflict harm. What do you think on this, Vincent?

The countdown worked well. We did spend three "ticks" positioning, then three ticks of concentrated fire. This led to tension: as the final tick started, the front still had a foothold in the hardholding, which, had they retained it, would have meant the battle ended with them achieving a foothold. They were driven out during that final tick.

Now, Sean likes to break games. So his Savvyhead chose, as his three toybox items, Weirdtech, Weapons and Heavy Equipment. These were all combined in a single Weirdtech item, a hovering drone which effectively became Sean's character. It did 1-6 + 1-2 harm to everything (Weirdtech plus Weapons) and had 6 armour, protecting it from everything.

This didn't break the game, although it was rather powerful. At one, rather wonderful, point, Sean did 6 harm to a child with an AK-47, then did a Things Speak roll on the bloody pulp that remained: what is wrong with this and how do I fix it? I told him that it was dead and could only be fixed by gathering spare body parts, then breathing life into it using a particular virus. So, well, it looks like we're heading for zombies next week.

More NPCs this week. A beautiful market trader, Red, took a drive in Adrian's Ferrari (he has a Ferrari, because we liked the incongruity) and suggested he take over the hardholding; Dave rescued a child, Albert, together with some blinded snipers; Chris gave AK-47s to another market trader, Weasel, and asked him to cover a bunch of captured children. Weasel executed them instead.

So, basically working well, I think. My Front N19 was vanquished this week. My other front, Panacea, is coming to the fore and is connected with the virus above. There's a danger of the Fronts becoming monster of the week, which I must avoid: it's essential that we don't just raid Panacea's headquarters next week. I need a new Front for next week, to shake things up.

One problem is that PCs seem rather two-dimensional. I'm not sure what their goals are, really, so I'm not sure how to design Fronts to affect them.

Graham

[Dionysus]

Just wondering out loud here - i've read all the hadbooks but not got around to playing yet.

I've been reading lots of other rpg systems recently, and something that struck me is the importance of character ideals/beliefs/motivations. The importance of this came out of my game night last night where the entire game revolved around "intimacties" and motivations (exalted game).

It ties into what type of Front you would be putting together as well - I find that when the players have given their characters a great motivation/intimacy i play to that much more - I want to test that motivation.

Going from the Firefly source for Apocalypse World, how about each character needs a belief/saying - Jayne would be "whats in it for me?" Mal would be "keep flying", etc.

[Dionysus]

- damn cant edit..
forgot to add, the MC would be aiming to challenge those beliefs, or put the characters in situations where those beliefs would cause trouble.

[lumpley]

You've fulfilled my vision for that savvyhead move. Perfect.

I don't know what to say about the 2-D PCs! It worries me. Our PCs have been pretty wonderfully deep.

For Hx for new PCs:
- Have everybody introduce their characters again.
- Have the new player(s) make all the decisions their playbooks call for.
- Don't let the old players re-make their decisions.

I think that should do it, yeah?

-Vincent