Step-by-step: how to write up a front

This post was originally a conversation on the Dungeon World Tavern back in Google+. Bryan Alexander said "Let's talk about Fronts and Dangers and Grim Portents... you start!"    

Later in the conversation, Bryan said "Honestly, I'm struggling a bit with understanding it myself. I've reread the chapter three times now and it isn't really clicking. We are three sessions in and while I have several ideas and things that tie into each other--I’m not quite sure how it is supposed to come together in terms of how the book says to do it."

And, yeah... Fronts are one of the chapters that folks in the DW community regularly point to and say "this could be easier to understand."  So here's my answer to Bryan, regarding how to proceduralize it.  Maybe you'll find it useful, too? 

From 20 Dungeon Starters (Marhsall Miller, Mark Tygart)

After your first session (or maybe two):

Dangers

1) Look at the fiction already established, and identify the dynamic actors, the people or things that will move forward and adapt and pursue an agenda: the rival adventurers pillaging the dungeon; the abusive lord looking to increase his power; the goblins trying to defend their home. Each is a Danger.

2) Look for fragile, untenable, unstable circumstances. Like a crumbling dungeon holding a slumbering terror, a village simmering with resentment at its abusive lord, a disease or curse poised to sweep through the land. Each is a Danger, though maybe not yet active. Consider putting a “face” to each of these dangers, like the rabble-rousing matron who’s had enough or the spirit of the restless priest-king buried in the tomb.

More noodling on Stonetop's gear & inventory system

We've now gone through about a dozen sessions with the current version of Stonetop's inventory system, and I'm... dissatisfied.

I'm leaning strongly towards something more like what I'm using in Homebrew World, something like this:

Some background... how'd we get here?

The gear lists (and how PCs acquire gear) have always been an important part of the game. The core conceit of Stonetop is that you're the heroes of a small, isolated, fantasy iron-age village. "Adventures" usually mean going out into the world to do something on the town's behalf. 

As such, I've always had three important goals for Stonetop's gear (and related systems):

Online Version of Homebrew World

I just finished creating an online character keeper for Homebrew World. Check it out!

Current online version

You'll need to save your own copy in order to use it. Instructions on the first tab (GM Stuff). 

The main action happens on the PCs tab: there are columns for each class playbook, with the intention that you'd collapse the unused classes and have everyone's character sheet visible on one widescreen monitor.  Or, close to everyone's sheets... if you're doing 3 PCs it'll probably work. 4+ and you'll have to do some horizontal scrolling. 

Lots of vertical scrolling will be involved no matter what. I have my doubts about how usable this would be for folks on a mobile device, but for a laptop or desktop with a widescreen monitor available, I think it'll be a pretty solid solution. 

I've tried to preserve most of the "functionality" of the printed playbooks, including pick-lists and the layout of the Gear sections. Aside from collapsing/expanding groups, I'd advise against making any changes that trigger the "You’re trying to edit part of this sheet that shouldn’t be changed accidentally" warning.  Don't insert rows or columns, don't copy/paste anything.  It's fairly brittle, unfortunately. 

If you use these, please drop a line in the comments and let me know how they work for you and your group!

How to handle "boss" monsters in DW

I originally posted this on the Dungeon World Tavern, in response to Lauri Maijala asking: 

"How do you handle wizards etc. 'boss monsters' that do not have a cohort of minions to keep the characters busy. I have failed constantly with them and feel like even three characters can take out any single threat without too much of a trouble."

The Dungeon World community at large is pretty quick to say "read the 16 HP dragon" article (content warning: passing reference to violence against children) when someone asks about making monsters more than just their numbers.  It's a good article, but it doesn't really tell you how to do those things; it shows you a high-level example of those things in action. 

It's on my "someday maybe" list to write up a fictionalized "actual" play example of the 16 HP dragon incident, showing how that scene might have actually played out, with moves and rolls and GM deliberation. 

But until then, here's an attempt at some specific, actionable advice for running "boss" monsters. 

Step 1: Stat the boss monster up, hardcore

Use their moves, special qualities, and potentially their lair and gear to make them hard to get at, able to interrupt player actions, and capable of dealing with multiple foes at once. Bonus points for moves that take PCs out of the fight without actually killing them.

E.g. qualities like “Aura of will-sapping menace” or “Hidden by swirling shadows.”  Moves like “Reveal a preparation” or “Unleash a spell of death and destruction” or “Turn their minds and fears against them.”

For a spellcaster/magic-user, maybe think a little about the specific spells they can cast, or at least the nature of those spells.  Try to word that into your moves (“Unleash a deadly spell of fire and flame” is better than “Unleash a spell of death and destruction”). Or, make a list.  But if this really is a big bad, don’t feel constrained by the list. Think of that list as giving yourself permission to do those things, but maybe they can do other stuff, too.

if it helps, find a badass picture that helps you visualize the BBEG

Defy Danger, Restated

For Homebrew World v1.5, I've rewritten Defy Danger as follows:

I've been thinking about this move a lot the past few weeks, inspired largely by this post on the Gauntlet Forums, but also this old post from the PbtA G+ Community. 

I think the salient points of those conversations boil down to:

• Defy Danger's trigger is incredibly broad and thus can arguably be triggered by just about any action with a modicum or risk
• The move itself doesn't necessarily prompt players to say or do interesting things. It just serves as a fallback task resolution mechanic.
• It sort of gives license to players to try ridiculous things, with the presumption that on a 10+ it'll work with no consequence. 
• The 10+ result doesn't really do much to change the situation. It more deflates tensions ("phew") than pushes the game in a new direction. 
• It'd arguably be more interesting if the move wasn't there at all, and when a character did something risky or dangerous that otherwise wasn't covered by another basic move, the GM presented a hard bargain or ugly choice, or just say what happened and follow up with another soft move, escalating until move is triggered.

I can see where a lot of where this is coming from. I do think it's easy (especially for newer GMs) to over-invoke Defy Danger, calling for a roll when the stakes aren't very interesting (I know I've done it).  I think it might be nice if the move somehow encouraged more dynamic or surprising outcomes (the way that Keep Your Cool does in Monsterhearts 2e) or at least more interesting actions (e.g. if "I dodge out of the way" wouldn't trigger it, but "I duck under his blade and dart inside his guard!" would).  

This revision doesn't get all the way, but I'm not entirely certain that any revision could get there without significantly restructuring the game. The move is simply doing to much. Instead, I'm going for: 

• A clearer trigger
• Better descriptions of when to use each stat
• A more reasonable 10+ description
• A 7-9 result that provides better guidance
  

The trigger

So, here's the original trigger for Defy Danger:

When you act despite an imminent threat or suffer a calamity, say how you deal with it and roll.

And here's mine:

When the stakes are high, danger looms, and you act anyway, roll...

This is basically just rephrasing "when you act despite an imminent threat," but I think it's better because it clarifies that the stakes need to be high before the danger matters. If I'm walking a tightrope, there's an imminent threat that I fall off it. But if it's only 5 feet off the ground and no one's chasing me and I'm not trying to impress anyone and I can just try again... well, whatever? Don't roll. Right?

For experienced players and GMs, I don't think this would change how or when Defy Danger gets triggered. But for newer players and GMs, I hope it will at least push play in the right direction, towards high stakes and danger looming and awesome characters acting anyway, rather than toward... skill checks, I guess. 

You will notice that this version of the move doesn't have anything like the "suffer a calamity" clause that the original version does. Mostly, it's because I don't think it's necessary.  If you suffer a calamity (your arm is cut off, you fall down a slope, your caught in a gout of dragonfire, you're poisoned, whatever), then whatever you do next, the stakes are almost certainly high and danger is almost certainly looming.  I.e. you're going to Defy Danger anyhow, unless you just lay down and die.  So why do we need this move?

A couple folks I talked to suggested that the "suffer a calamity" cause is there to determine just how bad an injury or other calamity is.  Like, if you get stabbed by a poison dagger, Defy Danger with CON to see how badly the poison affects you. 

To which I respond: meh. I guess if your GM move was Deal Damage and you knew the enemy had a poison dagger, that maybe would make sense and work?  But Deal Damage is a Crap Move, and in HBW it's replaced with "Hurt Them."  If my move was "Hurt Them" with a poisoned dagger, I'm going to hurt them:  "That cut on you arm is burning, way worse than it should, and you start to feel your muscles seize up, your vision is going blurry... you've been poisoned, you're sure! What do you do?"  And then whatever they do next, the stakes are high and danger looms, so Defy Danger, yeah?

That stat descriptions

In the original Defy Danger: 

...say how you deal with it. If you do it...

• ...by powering through, +Str
• ...by getting out of the way or acting fast, +Dex
• ...by enduring, +Con
• ...with quick thinking, +Int
• ...through mental fortitude, +Wis
• ...using charm and social grace, +Cha

In this version, it's:

...and you act anyway, roll...

• +STR to power through or test your might 
• +DEX to employ speed, agility, or finesse
• +CON to endure or hold steady
• +INT to apply expertise or enact a clever plan
• +WIS to exert willpower or rely on your senses
• +CHA to charm, bluff, impress, or fit in 

It's mostly just a rephrasing, but I think these do a better job of reflecting how the stats actually get used. For example, every GM I've ever played with has called for DEX to Defy Danger by moving silently or hiding in shadows... even though it isn't covered by "getting out of the way or acting fast."  It would be covered by agility or finesse.

On a 10+...

In the original Defy Danger, the 10+ clause is:

On a 10+, you do what you set out to, the threat doesn’t come to bear.

I think the wording is pretty weird, but the real problem, I think, is that implies that a 10+ is consequence-free: "the threat doesn't come to bear."  I haven't seen it much myself, but I can easily imagine that leading to declarations like "He swings the club at me?  I just grit my teeth and take it!" with the assumption that a 10+ means he'll be fine and shrug off the blow.

Now, obviously, this is the sort of place for player-level conversation and GM moves like tell them the consequences and ask.  "You're just gonna take the hit?  I mean, okay, but you'll be Defying Danger with CON and it's gonna be like d8+3 damage even if you get a 10+. You sure?" 

But it'd be better if the move itself tempered expectations. Hence:

On a 10+, you pull it off as well as one could hope.

I guess you could get into some annoying conversations like "well, I can hope for quite a lot!" But at the very least, it's setting an expectation of "within reasonable limits."

On a 7-9...

In the original Defy Danger, the 7-9 clause is:

On a 7–9, you stumble, hesitate, or flinch: the GM will offer you a worse outcome, hard bargain, or ugly choice.

Oof.

Okay, first of all:  "stumble, hesitate, or flinch" has always been my least favorite line in any of the basic moves. It describes a fictional outcome, and then implies that said fictional outcome leads directly into the worse outcome, hard bargain, or ugly choice. Well, first of all: stumbling, hesitating, or flinching doesn't make sense as a fictional outcome in many of the cases that involve Defying Danger.  I mean, yeah, you can make it fit, if you really try to. But it's work. And in my experience, when I've tried to keep stumble/hesitate/flinch in mind, it's actively made it harder to come up with good, interesting results that are still fundamentally a success.

The "stumble, hesitate, or flinch" clause makes a lot more sense in Apocalypse World's Act Under Fire move. But that move is all about keeping your cool, as opposed powering through/acting quickly/all the other ways to Defy Danger. And even in AW, the example 7-9 results ignore the "stumble, hesitate, or flinch" part and just go straight to worse outcome/hard bargain/ugly choice.

So: gone. It's actually been gone from both Homebrew World and Stonetop from almost the beginning. 

More importantly:  the "worse outcome, hard bargain, or ugly choice" part of the move has never felt like it offered particularly good guidance to GMs.  The number of G+ conversations, Reddit posts, conversations on the old Barf Forth forums, etc. that have stemmed from that phrasing are numerous. 

My take on it has always been:

• Worse outcome: you do the thing, but the outcome isn't as good as you'd hoped. 
• Hard bargain:  "You can do it, but..."  Basically, tell them the cost or the consequences and give them a chance to back off.
• Ugly choice:  They do it, but it doing it, they have to pick between two or more consequences or costs.  

The distinction between "hard bargain" and "ugly choice" is fuzzy, and not necessarily helpful to the GM.   Also: it's easy for a new GM or player to read "worse outcome" as "worse than you when you started" and not "worse than what you were hoping for" and that's not right at all. It's important to remember that a 7-9 is still fundamentally successful. 


Both the hard bargain and the ugly choice involve costs or consequences, or maybe a lesser successes.  So... why not just say that? But there's still value in those "you can do it, if" and "well, you can do it, but either __ or __."  That led me to this:

On a 7-9, you can do it, but the GM will present a lesser success, a cost, or a consequence (and maybe a choice between them, or a chance to back down).

This wording:

1. Establishes that they can do the thing (fundamentally a success, right?)
2. Replaces "worse outcome" with "lesser success" (clearer, reinforces that that it's still fundamentally a success)
3. Puts the cost or consequence right in there, in plain language
4. Keeps the possibility of a hard bargain or ugly choice. 
   
   

In summary

I don't think this really changes Defy Danger significantly. I hope that it makes it clearer, and easier to use, and helps set appropriate expectations.  

Homebrew World v1.5 (gear & inventory updates, Defy Danger rewrite)

I just posted version 1.5 of Homebrew World.  You can find it here:

Current version

If you aren't familiar with this project:

• It's a revised version of Dungeon World that's pared down for one-shots and short-run (2-4 session) games. 
• It features a lot of changes that would I'd include in a 2nd edition of Dungeon World were I the one in charge of it:  advantage/disadvantage (instead of +1/-2 etc), tweaks or straight-up rewrites to many of the basic moves and classes, backgrounds & drives instead of racial moves & alignment, and some significant changes to gear. The document itself has a more comprehensive list.

New (Final?) Gear & Inventory System

The original gear & inventory system was okay, but a little unintuitive. It had a lot of hidden features, and didn't actually generate as much scarcity as I wanted it to. 

So I replaced it with this version. Some feedback on Reddit and conversations on the DW Discord server confirmed some fears I had with that system. Mainly: the v1.4 system was trying to combine both an encumbrance system with the "producing gear" system and when characters started dropping things or moving items between them, it got weird. You could mark up to (e.g.) 4 diamonds, but it wasn't clear what happened if you marked an item to produce a thing and then dropped it.

Here's what the new version looks like:

from the Thief

from the Cleric

At the start of play, you can assign a number of diamonds to specific items or to "Undefined."

During play, you can Have What You Need:

So as the Cleric, I might chose to start with a cudgel and Supplies (two diamonds), and mark 3 diamonds in Undefined. 

During play, when a fight breaks out, I might declare that I'm wearing a chain shirt (and move a diamond from Undefined to the "Leather cuirass or chain shirt" item). 

Later, I decide to produce a lantern, so I clear an Undefined diamond, mark one under Other items, and write in "Lantern."  I could then spend a use of Supplies to produce a tinderbox (a small item). 

After a few hours of exploring, the lantern's oil burns low and I replenish it with a use of Supplies (to produce lamp oil, which I don't bother writing down because whatever). 

I've got one Undefined diamond and one use of Supplies remaining.  

Every class also has a Max Load (the same as the max number of diamonds you can start with). This should be fairly obvious, but to be clear:

• If you pick up a new item in play (by looting it, buying it, another character giving it to you, etc.) then it gets added to your inventory. Unless it's small, it counts against your Max Load.  
• If you drop an item during play, or use it up, or it's destroyed, then you erase it--it no longer counts against your Max Load.  
• If you give something to another player (even an Undefined diamond), erase it from your inventory and add it to theirs--it no longer counts against your Max Load, but does count against theirs. 
• Undefined diamonds count against your Max Load.

Doesn't this encourage players to put everything in Undefined and then have exactly what they need in play?  Yup! That's largely the point.  In practice, it seems that players assign enough gear to get a clear picture of their character, and leave the rest undefined.

So what changed?

The biggest differences between this version of the gear system and version 1.4 are:  

• There's no more choice between "Light" vs. "Normal" vs. "Heavy" Load. Each class has a set number of diamonds they can mark at character creation or during play. 
• There's a specific place to track "Undefined" diamonds, distinct from the total number of diamonds you can carry (Max Load).
• As a result, there's no need for the Loot or Manage Inventory moves, or any other detailed explanation of how specified gear interacts with quantum, undefined gear. 

In my initial playtesting, this system has worked very well. Players grocked the "Undefined" thing immediately. The only real confusion stemmed from players Having What They Need, and whether they needed to assign an Undefined diamond or expend supplies. I found they were more likely to burn up their diamonds, even on things I thought was pretty obviously small.  

I also added a couple class moves that played in this design space. A few classes have moves that increase their Max Load and starting diamonds. The Fighter (Veteran of the Wars) gets +1 diamond (7 total) and an extra use from Supplies.  The Barbarian has a Max Load of 3 by default, but Musclebound increases it to 5. And the Ranger has a Max Load of 3 by default but an advance that can give them +2 diamonds. 

Other changes

The other big change is in the wording of Defy Danger:

My hope is that this wording makes it clearer when to trigger the move (high stakes + danger + action) and that the 7-9 result provides GMs with more useful guidance.  It's still fundamentally the same move, though.

There are also some minor tweaks here and there:

• The Bard >> Wandering Folk: previously, it basically gave three times the Bard could take advantage on a roll, with the relatively simple requirement of making it relevant to their People's traits.  Now, they can do that once, and then their heritage needs to cause trouble before they can use it again. 
• The Cleric: fixed a mistake in their inventory. Replaced the wizard's spell book (ha!) with a Sacred Text ([][] uses, slow, cast a spell that's not prepared).
• Some minor tweaking of the I Know a Guy optional move and the Thief >> Operative's background move, so that the Thief move is definitely better.
• Also some tweaking to the Run Away optional move; I didn't quite like the results or modifiers, and I had to rethink it anyway to deal with the new gear system.   

Homebrew World Updates (v1.4, new gear & load system)

I just posted version 1.4 of Homebrew World.  You can find it here:

Current version

If you aren't familiar with this project: it's a revised version of Dungeon World that's pared down for one-shots and short-run (2-4 session) games. It features a lot of changes that would I'd include in a 2nd edition of Dungeon World were I the one in charge of it:  advantage/disadvantage (instead of +1/-2 etc), tweaks or straight-up rewrites to many of the basic moves and classes, backgrounds & drives instead of racial moves & alignment, and some significant changes to gear. The document itself has a more comprehensive list.

What's changed in 1.4?  Starting with little things:

• I rearranged the Basic Moves, Violence & Recovery Moves, and Optional Moves. Instead of using 1/2 page inserts for the Basic & Violence moves, they now use a full-page, double-sided sheet. I found the inserts involved too much flipping around, and they tended to get lost/forgotten in play.  
• I added some more optional moves, largely cribbing from work I'd done for Drowning & Falling. Also borrowed heavily from Addrymar Palinor's "Narrate a Fight" move. Also added some lists of example mundane, common items that one can produce with Have What You Need.  
• Significantly updated The Wielder. Previously, it was just the Fighter but with a signature weapon instead of weapon specializations. Now, it's got it's own Backgrounds, names, looks, moves, advances... and I added another weapon, an homage to Stormbringer and Blackrazor, because duh.  
• Added a "player's guide" to the back page of each playbook, and expanded the space for notes. I don't expect the player's guide to referenced all that much, but I like having it there as something to reference, or read during breaks or "downtime."
• Redid the approach to gear (including the moves surrounding it).

That last one is the biggest update. Here's how the gear system used to work. It wasn't bad, but it was a little less intuitive than I wanted.  There were a lot of hidden features, and this tries to remove those and make everything more transparent. (If you find yourself thinking "this is lifted almost straight from Blades in the Dark," you aren't wrong.)

The New "Load" System

Each playbook has a "Load" section that looks like this:

The Figher's Load section (not filled out)

The Fighter's Load section

The only decision you need to make at the start of play is whether you're carrying a Light, Normal, or Heavy Load. The descriptions under each ("quick and quiet" or "weighed down, not quiet" or "noisy, slow hot, quick to tire") don't have any specific mechanical impact, but they describe the fiction. A character with a Light Load might not even need to Defy Danger to move quietly or to carefully pick their way up an unstable slope, but someone with a Normal or Heavy Load might. 

Your chosen Load determines how many "diamonds" worth of gear you can be carrying. A "diamond" is basically a gear slot. 

• Most "significant" items (a sword, light armor, a coil of rope) takes up one diamond (slot)
• Each "big" item (heavy armor, a shield, a polearm, a 10-ft pole) takes up two diamonds (slots)
• Small items (a knife, a purse of coins, etc.) don't take up diamonds (slots), but the unwritten rule is "they have to fit in the box" and the official rule is "be reasonable."

At the start of play, you can choose to define as many or as few of your diamonds as you want. During play, you can use the Have What You Need Move:

In practice, I assume that most players will take a Normal Load and then assign 2 or 3 of their diamonds, leaving 1 or 2 undefined. That's what I'd do. 

Each class also starts with a knife/dagger, maybe another small item (like a holy symbol), and gets a choice of 1 special small item (a healing elixir, a pouch of coins, etc.).  You can produce more small items by using Have What You Need and expending 1 use of Supplies (see below).

Loot

A big reason for adventure games like Dungeon World (and Homebrew World) to track inventory at all is because it forces decisions. As you use up your gear and supplies, you become more prone to disaster and have to start thinking about turning back. Inventory systems also force decisions when it comes to looting treasure: how much can you take with you, and what are you willing to give up in order to do so?

Here's how loot interacts with the Load system:

Basically: loot counts against your diamonds (gear slots). 

• If you add loot to a slot and you're still under your Load, it's assumed that you've taken something out of your inventory in order to make room for the loot.  
• If the looted item pushes you over your current Load, that's fine--but you don't have any undefined diamonds anymore. For example, if the Fighter has a Normal Load and 5 diamonds already defined, and then she picks up a stone idol (1 diamond), she suffers from the fictional positioning of having a Heavy Load but she doesn't get to later Have What She Needs and produce a 7th item. 

You can use Loot to carry around more diamonds than permitted by a Heavy Load, but assume that you're basically giving the GM carte blanche to show you the downside of your gear.  

Oh, and: yes, it's totally viable (and smart) to Have What You Need, give that item to another PC with empty slots, and then Loot.

Supplies

"Supplies" are a 1-diamond item that come with 3 uses. They combine most of the expendable resources that you find in Dungeon World: rations, bandages, adventuring gear, etc. (In the previous versions of Homebrew World, Supplies also included ammo. That's changed now! See below.)

You can expend a use of Supplies to:

• Have What You Need and produce a small, common and mundane item (like some chalk, a ball of twine, etc.)  
• Use the Recover move and regain 5 HP (and, potentially, deal with a troublesome injury or debility). 
• Feed the party when you Make Camp, and/or get an extra benefit from making camp.

Many of the class Backgrounds also have special things that you can do with Supplies. For example, a Gladiator (Fighter) can expend 1 use of Supplies to have their gear take a blow and halve the effects. An Assassin (Thief) can expend 1 use of Supplies to produce a vial of poison. A Courtesan (Bard) can expend 1 use of Supplies to produce a suitable gift for a notable figure they just met, gaining advantage on their next roll against them. 

(The biggest differences for Supplies in this version and earlier versions of Homebrew World are that ammo is no longer subsumed by Supplies and that you don't have to expend Supplies to produce "slot" items. That's now handled by the Load system.)

Ammo

In Dungeon World, "Ammo 3" is an abstraction that means you can choose "reduce your Ammo" 3 times when you Volley (or otherwise have the GM use up your resources). However, I've found that you almost always have to explain that to a new player--"no, that's not how many individual shots you have, it's an abstraction... take a look at the Volley move...").

In earlier versions of HBW, I just lumped ammo in with Supplies, and you could expend Supplies or mark "Out of ammo" on a 7-9 to Volley. 

With this version, ranged weapons have a pair of "statuses" after each one, like this...

• Bow and arrows ([] low ammo   [] out of ammo)
• Extra arrows ([] plenty left  [] running low  [] all out)

...and the 7-9 option on Volley says "Deplete your ammunition; mark the next status next to your weapon/ammo)."  I think that's a lot clearer. And if a player wants to haggle and be like "can I expend a use of Supplies to clear one of these?" then I think that's fine.

Shields

Shields are big, yo. And kind of a pain to lug around. And, frankly, they have a pretty significant impact on your effectiveness in a fight. I always found it odd that DW had them weigh as much as a sword (2 weight) and give +1 Armor. 

Yes, yes, you also have a shield and that fiction is pretty damn important. But I wanted to ramp up both the "cost" of carrying a shield and their effectiveness.  

Cost was easy and obvious: they're 2-diamond items. But for effectiveness... I didn't want to increase the Armor bonus (because too much Armor can easily become an issue).  So instead: they now give +1 Readiness (my term for "hold") when you Defend and get a 7+. I think that's a fair trade for taking up an extra inventory slot.

"Out of..." is Gone

The old inventory system for Homebrew World used an "Out of..." mechanic, where you had a section for indicating what things you were out of (ammo, food, healing supplies, a few blanks) and therefore couldn't produce with Supplies.  You could also mark "Out of __" to produce a small item without having to expend Supplies.  And most things that required you to expend Supplies also let you mark "out of __" instead.

Basically, the "Out of..." mechanic gave everyone like 5 or 6 "free" uses of Supplies, but that wasn't obvious at all.  Which actually undermined the scarcity equation of the system pretty significantly.  It also required mechanisms for clearing those "Out of __" conditions.  

So... it's gone.  The GM is still well within their rights to say "you land hard and hear something break in your pack... take a d6 damage, mark off 1 use of Supplies, and you can't Have What You Need to produce anything breakable or fragile."

Scarcity

This system intentionally puts some pretty significant limits on how much crap the PCs can be carrying around. If you have a Normal Load, you probably have a weapon, some armor, maybe 3 or 6 uses of Supplies, and like 1 undefined slot.  And those Supplies can get used up pretty darn quickly. Lantern?  That's a diamond (inventory slot).  Tinderbox?  That's a use of Supplies?  Need to Recover?  That's one more use of Supplies.  Rope?  That's your last diamond.  Now what?

This scarcity is intentional.

Remember: Homebrew World is intended to be used with one-shots or short-run games. There isn't time to slowly chip away at the party's resources. If this system is going to be meaningful, the scarcity has to become relevant quickly.  

I'm honestly not 100% sure that I've hit the right balance. I think that maybe 3-uses of Supplies per diamond is too much.  But I've also tried to include an array of tempting other items in each class's Load, so that not everyone is running around with 6 Supplies.  We'll see how it goes in play.

The G+ Archives

Today is April 2, 2019, and those of us who regularly used Google+ are sitting waiting for the end. Google announced that the platform would go down sometime today. As of this moment, it's still there. But the end is soon.

G+ was mostly ignored by the larger world, but it was a hotbed of activity for the RPG scene. The initial integration with Hangouts meant that bloggers and other RPG folks could easily coordinate and play games with each other online. That led to a critical mass of gamers--especially indie RPG and OSR gamers--hanging out and talking on G+, and it became a sort of constant, ongoing salon. Ideas where exchanged, friends and partnerships were established. There was drama, yes, and schisms and bad actors. But overall: it was really something.

In the past few months, I've used Friends+Me's Google+ Exporter to archive about 30 RPG communities and back them up onto WordPress sites. Those archives live here:

https://gplusarchive.online

The archived communities are:

• Blades in the Dark
  
• The Dungeon World Tavern
• Inverse World
• Lampblack & Brimstone
• Planarch Codex: Astral Repository
• Stonetop
• Worlds of Adventure
  
• Powered by the Apocalypse
• Alas for the Awful Sea
• Bluebeard's Bride
• Epyllion
• Legacy: Life Among the Ruins
• Masks: A New Generation
• Monster of the Week Roadhouse
• Monsterhearts
• Nahual
• Night Witches
• Pasión de las Pasiones
• Sagas of the Icelanders
• The City of Judas
• The Sprawl
• The Veil
• The Watch
• Uncharted Worlds
• Urban Shadows
• Veil 2020
• Velvet Glove
• Wheel Tree Press (the Sword, the Crown, and the Unspeakable Power, Time Cellist, Greenlight)
• World Wide Wrestling
• Worlds in Peril
  
• The Gauntlet

Together, there are about 37,000 posts and 282,000 comments saved.  My hope is that people of the future can continue to reference these communities, not just as historical artifacts but as a source of wisdom and insight. There is gold buried in these archives. In the future, I intend to mine some of it for this blog. I hope others do likewise. 

If I didn't archive your community: I'm sorry. It wasn't an intentional thing. I started with the ones that I was active and involved in, then expanded to various communities related to PbtA games.  I feel bad that I didn't get any OSR communities, but I was never directly involved in those and didn't even know where to start.

Cheers.

-Jeremy

On Learning to Run Dungeon World

Over on Google+ (in it's last, dying days), Tom Pleasant said this (across a couple different comments):

I’ve done a reasonable amount of storygames but am struggling to grok GMing *World.... Played a dozen different *World games and read up on how to run it. All the agendas and things just make me panic.

I've heard that sentiment before and I totally get it. It seems like you're supposed to constantly keep about a dozen different principles in your mind and make sure that anything you say comes from a list of another 12-20 (or more) proscribed GM moves. How the hell are you supposed to do that and juggle all the social realities of the table and know the rules of the game and keep your setting coherent and and and and.

You know. Just do this. It's easy.

It doesn't help that text of most PbtA games present the "How to GM" chapter as rules that the GM must follow as opposed to advice. Here's the Dungeon World text:

This chapter isn’t about advice for the GM or optional tips and tricks on how best to play Dungeon World. It’s a chapter with procedures and rules for whoever takes on the role of GM.

Here's my (slightly heretical) advice, to him and any other potential GM who's intimidated by the agenda, principles, and GM moves, of Dungeon World.  

Forget the agenda. Ignore the principles. Run the game.  

If you've run pretty much any role playing game before, and certainly if you played Dungeon World or another PbtA game, then you already know the most basic, fundamental thing that you need to know: the game is a conversation.

Establish the situation. ("You're standing in front of these two huge teak-wood doors. The mountain wind howls all around you in the fading light. Your breath catches on the cold air, getting colder. It'll be night soon.").  Keep it brief. Maybe ask the characters some questions about why they're there, what they hope to find, what they're worried about it, why they shouldn't dally. As much or as little as you and they are comfortable with. Enough to set the scene and establish their motive for being there.

Restate the scene and the situation (doors, cold wind, getting darker and colder). Turn to a particular player and ask their character "What do you do?" 

If they ask questions about the situation, and you think you the answers would be self-evident, answer them honestly and generously.  ("Are there any handles or anything on the doors?" "Oh, yeah, there are these huge brass rings on each door, like the size of your arms making a circle. They hang down so the bottom is at about chest height.")  Then: What do you do?

If they ask questions about the situation, and you DON'T think the answer would readily apparent, tell them what's required to learn it. Maybe it involves doing something.  Maybe it involves them making a move.  ("Can we hear any noise from inside?" "No, but they're really thick and it's windy out here. Maybe if you pressed your ear to the doors?" or "Are there any footprints or signs that they've been opened recently?"  "Sounds like you're studying the situation. Discern Realities?")  Ask if they do that. If they do, say what happens or engage the move and resolve it per the rules.

If they do something with an obvious outcome, say what happens as a result. ("I grab onto one of the big brass rings and pull." "There's a creaking noise, and the door slowly grinds open. It's like dragging a car in neutral, it's so heavy.  Dust falls from up top as you, gets caught in the wind and swirls. Darkness looms inside.")  Then: What do you do? 

If things are dragging and the PCs are just dickering around, or you want to get to some action, then telegraph some trouble. ("As you step into the door and get your torches lit, you see a huge, vaulted hallway leading into the darkness. Just at the edge of your torchlight, you see a boot, lying in the ground. Then you realize it's attached to a bony leg. A dead figure, sprawled in the middle of the hall.") Then: What do you do?  (Chances are that they'll do something triggers a move. Resolve it.)

If they do something that would trigger a bad thing, say how the bad thing starts to happen but not how it finishes. ("As you approach the dead body, the tile under your foot starts to give way just a little, then click.").  Establish a bad thing about to happen, but stop while it's still unfurling, and ask them (or another character): What do you do?

If they don't do something to reasonably address the bad thing, clarify with them. ("You just stand there? Even though you pretty clearly just stepped on a pressure plate?")  If they really do ignore it ("Pressure plate? pfft, whatever, I study this corpse.") then bring it home.The bad thing happens, full force. ("You feel this burning stab in your gut and then your ears register this THWOOSH and you realize that there's this six-inch dart sticking out of your stomach. Take d6 damage and your whole body starts to feel like it's on fire.")  Probably turn to someone else and say that they just saw that happen: What do you do?

If, when you introduce the threat, they say that they do something about it (good on them), then they're probably triggering a move. Resolve it!  ("Oh, crap, a pressure plate? I dive back and to the side." "Okay, sounds like Defying Danger with DEX to me, roll it.") Resolve the move as written. ("A 7-9? How about a hard bargain? You can dive and get out of the way of what's coming, but your torch will go clattering off into the distance. Yeah?").

On a miss (6 or less) have them mark XP and then decide what's the most obvious bad thing that can happen?  It happens. Tell them what happens  ("As you dive out of the way, there's this burning stab in your leg. As you hit the ground, you realize you've got this 6-inch dart sticking out of your leg. Take 1d6 damage and holy hells does it burn, way worse than it should.")

However the move ends up resolving: re-establish the situation, turn to a specific player, and ask their character What do you do?

In a chaotic, fluid situation (like a fight), keep moving around between players. Each time you re-establish the scene for them, throw in something that they have to react to (not always bad, maybe it's just an opportunity, a chance to act) before you ask: What do you do?

Notice that I'm not referencing agenda, or principles, or GM moves.  You're simply:

1. Describing the situation
2. Answering their questions
3. Giving them some sort of hook or thing to react to
4. Asking them what they do
5. Saying what happens next (return to 1)
   OR
6. Following the rules of the player-facing moves, then saying what happens next (return to 1).

That's the flow of the game, the conversation.

Not sure what to do for #2?  Or as a result of #5?  Skim over your GM moves list and see if something inspires you.

But mostly, just follow the natural fiction of the game and the rules. And don't beat yourself up if for not doing it "right".


Then, after the game, think back on the decisions you made, the things you decided to say. Run those things against the game's proscribed agenda. Did you say or do anything that violated the agenda? Try to avoid that next time.

Look at the principles.  Did you say or do anything that violated them?  Think about what you could have done instead. Think about what adhering to that principle might have looked like.

Look at the GM moves. Think about your major decisions, the things you said to prompt action from the PCs or to give them hooks. Can you match each of those things to one or more of the GM moves?  Where there any decisions you made, where you could have done one of these other GM moves instead? Keep that all in mind for next time.

My ultimate point here is that the GM's agenda, principles, and moves are just ways to codify and describe good GMing.  Some GMs adhere to them closely and intentionally make their moves from the lists. Some GMs keep the principles constantly in mind.

But if they're acting as a barrier to you, and intimidating you, then fuck 'em.  Describe the situation. Give them hook or prompt a response. What do you do?  Resolve a move or say what happens. Repeat.

And then look back on your work and see how you could have done better.

GMing is a practice, like yoga or martial arts or meditation or painting or whatever. You get better at it by doing it, by reflecting on it, by constantly trying to do better.  No one starts off as a maestro. Don't be afraid of being bad or mediocre or less than excellent.  Do the work. Show up. Get better. Get good. Get great.

42 magic swords

the truth

We did some brainstorming on the DW Discord a little while back. 30 magic swords, no more than two sentences each. We came up with 30 in just under an hour. Then folks kept going. Enjoy.

1. A singing sword, floating in the darkness for ages, guarding this now-empty ruin from intruders yet so, so lonely. Jeremy Strandberg
2. A sword carved from the thigh bone of a Nephilim. Bane to both demons and angels, bleeds in the presence of either. Jeremy Strandberg
3. Shifter's Demon, this scimitar is engraved with the phases of the moon along the blade.  Any shapechanger who views the weapon finds themselves stuck constantly shifting between all their forms in agony. Torin Blood
4. A blade of ice that never melts. Extinguishes nearby fires when drawn. You’re never too warm or too hot in while you wield it, but neither do you feel any urgency or sense of passion (Your Drive for any session in which you wield it becomes “let a problem escalate while you do nothing.") Jeremy Strandberg
5. Marcu's miracle shortsword. A plain merchant guard's sword, passed from hand to hand for generations.  The wielder of the blade will never lose at a dicing game so long as it has been used in defence of a merchant in the last month. Torin Blood
6. Sidhe’s Lament, a scimitar of black starmetal  that hums with the music of the spheres when rapped on metal. The longer you fight with it, the greater its volume and vibration, until glass shatters and stones crack around you. Jeremy Strandberg
7. A sword carved of white wood, handle worn smooth and tiny notches chipped up and down the blade. Not much use against steel, but perfectly capable of beating the crap out of ghosts, wraiths, specters, and the like... won’t destroy them, but sure gives ‘em a lickin’. Jeremy Strandberg
8. The Slithering Steel of Abraxcus. This twisted and serrated sword breaker seems to always be in motion when held.  The blade shifts to always wrap around and trap weapons that attack the wielder. Torin Blood
9. Gefyn, a gladius of exceptional quality. It has endured millennia of constant wars and fighting. When sharpened, it never seems to lose material. Halsver
10. A sword made of leaves woven together with spider silk and magically hardened with the blood of an ancient elf. The memories of the elf come to the wielder as horrific dreams. Torin Blood
11. A leaf-shaped blade of orichalcum, dull red and no cross guard. When you cut or stab a creature infected by the Things Below, it burns like the heat of three forges and sears flesh and bone. Jeremy Strandberg
12. A longsword, stained crimson after being quenched in dragon's blood.  Light reflected from the blade reveals wounds that will be suffered within the next week. Torin Blood
13. The Historian's Lament. A rapier that, when thrust into any book, makes it so the book was never written. The wielder of the blade instantly learns everything that was in the book. Torin Blood
14. A serrated greatsword made of a single crystal. It is said when the sword sings a new age has dawned. Torin Blood
15. No blade, just a hilt with a grip wound in copper wire.  When you brandish it with confidence, a white blade of lightning forms—cuts clean through any metal but also discharges dangerous bolts at random. Jeremy Strandberg
16. Macco, the pacifist's katana. This blade appears to be ethereal and will pass through inanimate objects with no resistance. Deemed useless by hasty warriors, the thoughtful practitioner will recognize a slow pull against a moving object will realize a perfect clean slice. Halsve
17. A grim, notched iron sword, spotted with reddish flakes (rust? blood? both or neither?). When you wound someone with the sword but do not kill them, the wound will never fully heal, nor will it fester or get worse. Jeremy Strandberg
18. Goran's Eternity Severance,  an extremely ornate and gem-encrusted claymore. It passes harmlessly through all living material  but utterly consigns to oblivion the soul of any corpse it touches. Torin Blood
19. Bronze sword that once belonged to a petty warlord who trucked with the Things Below. When you wield the sword, those who follow you know no fear and their morale and commitment never falters (but if you wield the sword during a session, your Drive becomes “prove your superiority over another”) Jeremy Strandberg
20. A pair of earrings like tiny, graceful scimitars. Until you take them off your ears, at which point they become a pair of full-sized, graceful scimitars. Jeremy Strandberg
21. Juliana, blade of vengeance. Forged by a simple farmer with a singular purpose, this crude blade is dull in the hands of the dispassionate. When wielded by those mourning a lost love, it burns with a brilliant blue flame and a haunting child's voice whispers to its foes. Halsver
22. A simple, perfectly crafted blade of dull gray steel. Anyone who sees you draw it sees a perfectly clear, perfectly convincing vision of you cutting them down with it. Jeremy Strandberg
23. Ghostblade, sword of the old god. This blade doesn't cut through metal, flesh and bone, but instead bypasses the mortal shell, and strikes at soul and spirit. Slothman
24. Thornblight, a greatsword of what looks like an impossibly big and perfectly napped shard of obsidian. Cuts through wood, vines, briars, and any other vegetation like it was soft clay. Jeremy Strandberg
25. Purity. This longsword was forged in the blood of a dying angel. When wielded by one of pure heart and purpose, it enhances their power. When welded selfishly or in vengeance, it becomes a mundane blade. Slothman
26. A bronze blade with a hilt of shell and coral, always wet and glistening. Fog and mist billow around it, thicker and deeper the long it’s unsheathed, until eventually... things slither out of the fog. Jeremy Strandberg
27. Kuzzleyuff, a strange parrying dagger which is incredibly heavy and features an intricate mechanism that spins and rotates rapidly on the hilt. The dagger is clumsy to use intentionally, but will perfectly parry any strike that you fail to notice. Halsver
28. A blade of black iron quenched in the blood of a dozen innocent men. Cuts through any magical charms, wards, abjurations, or protections. Jeremy Strandberg
29. Plowshare. A historic gift from one king to another to sue for peace. This completely dull blade is useless in combat, but gives advantage on Parley. If ever used to kill, the magic leaves it and the killer is forever branded a tyrant and murderer to all who see him ChibiYossy
30. The first sword ever crafted, a crude and ugly thing. Every blow struck with it kills, but anyone who kills with it will be struck a killing blow by the next sword they face. Jeremy Strandberg
31. Chissors, a pair of blades that seem immutably attracted to one another. Once separated, they will remain apart until they both strike in tandem, shearing through their target and fixing to one another again. Halsver
32. Rotsman’s sidearm. This obsidian and ceramic blade is immune to all forms of corrosion and acid produced by slimes, jellies, pudding, and fungi. Also has many clever notches and serrations and can function as a pry bar, hatchet, saw, or entrenching tool in a pinch. Breaks easily on any kind of hard target like armor. ChibiYossy
33. Siddew's Way, a short sword with a core of rough hewn stone and ore encased in polished red bronze blade. This blade is invaluable to the adventurer in a hurry, when struck against an obstacle the sword points in a novel direction that is indeed a short-cut. Halsver
34. A bronze shortsword that once stabbed a black dragon through its skull and deep into it brain. Now has a greenish tinge, and constantly seeps a vicious acid when exposed to air (kept in a fitted glass sheath... don’t break it). Jeremy Strandberg
35. Blackbriar. A black blade made of polished living black ironwood. Has green shoots and vines growing out of it. Poisoned, but you have to water it regularly and expose it to sunlight every day, or it withers and dies, useful only as firewood. Not for dungeon delving! ChibiYossy
36. Some things are better in pairs. This set of two daggers glow a dull red when anyone who identifies as law enforcement is near.  The pair only works when together. Torin Blood
37. Captain Cutthroat's Cutlass, this rather large and ornate sword once belonged to a famous pirate. It bears a peculiar enchantment, when held against a person's neck, if that person lies about the whereabouts of their most valuable possession it sizzles like a hot pan. Halsver
38. The North Star is a long, thin, flat blade that has an ornate star map engraved in to its blade. This sword only ever points north, and is constantly parallel to the ground, even when sheathed or fighting. Burch
39. The Deceiver is a slender silver rapier that is actually considerably longer than it looks, having reach despite appearing to onlookers as a regular (if expensive looking) weapon. It fits in a normal sized scabbard without issue. Helicity
40. Heward’s Handy Dirk. This appears to be an ordinary leather belt buckle, but it's enchanted with a magic similar to a bag of holding. Grab the buckle in a certain way and pull, and you'll draw a steel short sword as if from a scabbard. Great for smuggling a weapon somewhere it’s not supposed to be... ChibiYossy
41. Jackal’s Tooth. This scrappy, curved blade does +2 damage to any opponent bigger than the wielder, and -2 damage to any opponent smaller. Pick on someone your own size! ChibiYossy
42. Blade of the Wailing Dead. When unsheathed, this blade causes all corpses in the area to animate. They follow the commands of the the wielder until the weapon is sheathed again.  Should the blade ever come into contact with a living creature, the wielder will immediately die and turn into a skeleton that cannot be destroyed until the creature the blade wounded dies. Torin Blood

Deal Damage is a Crap GM Move

I posted this essay on the G+ back in June of 2017. I still feel this way, and in Stonetop and Homebrew world, have replaced the GM move "Deal damage" with "Hurt them." It's not much of a difference, but I find that it better matches how I play. Fair warning: if you ever play DW (or a variation of it) with me running it, expect to be losing HP very often.

obligatory "wounded man" image

----------------------------------------------------

When I've played DW with less-experienced GMs—and certainly when I started GMing DW myself—I've seen this sort of thing happen a fair deal:

"Okay, you got a 7-9 to Hack & Slash the orc? Deal your damage. 3? Okay, he's still up. But he stabs you back. Take 1d8+1 damage.  You still up?  Okay, what do you do?"

The strawman GM in my example is making the GM move deal damage, but they aren't following the principle of begin and end with the fiction.  As a result, the whole thing is flat. The player reduces their character's HP total. We vaguely know that the PC landed their blow, and the orc landed one back. But we've got no sense of the actual fiction, the details, the momentum. Who hit whom how? When? And Where?  Is the PC's axe still stuck in the orc's shoulder? Does the orc up close and personal, stab-stab-stabbing you with his rusty knife?  What the hell is going on?

Now, you can blame that on the GM (obviously: they aren't following their principles).  But you've got literally a dozen principles always competing for your attention, and it can be tough to keep them all straight.

You can also lay a lot of blame at the feat of the Damage and HP and "down at 0 HP" system that DW inherited from D&D.  But if you start tinkering with any of those things, you end up changing basic moves, and class moves, and how you make monsters, and equipment, and spells, and pretty much the whole mechanical economy of the game.

So what about the GM move itself:  Deal Damage.  I'd like to argue that this move—its name, its description, the fact that it exists at all—is part of the problem. And maybe an easier one to fix.

Of all the GM moves, it's the only one that maps most directly to a purely mechanical outcome. "Take 1d8+1 damage."  The GM must evaluate the fiction a little to determine how much damage you should take, but not much… you can just look at the orc's damage die and say "you're fighting an orc, take 1d8+1 damage."  And because the result of move (the roll, losing HP) is so mechanical and abstract, it's easy to forget to return to the fiction and describe what that damage actually looks like.

(You don't see this issue nearly as much in Apocalypse World, even though it basically has HP and has basically the same move: inflict harm as established. I think there are two reasons. First, the way NPCs suffer harm is much more handwavy than in DW… each level of harm corresponds to a rough description of trauma, and it's GM fiat to determine if the NPC is still standing. Thus, the GM has to decide on the specific trauma, in the fiction, in order determine if the NPC is still a threat. It's pretty brilliant.  Second, against PCs, there's the Suffer Harm move, which can generate all sorts of interesting fiction.)

Compare deal damage to use up their resources. When the GM uses up resources, they must decide which resources to use up. If they decide to "use up" your shield, then the natural thing to say isn't "you lose your shield, reduce your Armor by 1" but rather "it smashes through your shield!" or "you feel the strap on your shield snap and the thing goes flying, what do you do?"  Even if the GM uses up an abstract resource (like adventuring gear or rations), it's pretty easy and natural for everyone to visual your pack getting smashed or torn open or whatever.  HP are such an abstraction that it's easy to just decrement them and move on.

Every now and then, the conversation crops up that you just shouldn't use the Deal Damage move, or that you shouldn't use it very much.  Other GM moves are more interesting, etc. etc.

Another relevant detail:  on page 165, there's this gem that often gets forgotten:

Note that “deal damage” is a move, but other moves may include damage as well. When an ogre flings you against a wall you take damage as surely as if he had smashed you with his fists.

With a sidebar of:

If a move causes damage not related to a monster, like a collapsing tunnel or fall into a pit, use the damage rules on page 21.

So… could we just remove "Deal Damage" from the GM's list of moves?  If it just flat-out wasn't a choice, and instead you always had to make a different GM move (or monster move), one that might also happen to deal damage, would that help GMs begin and end with the fiction?

Or would it just confuse things? Or not make a difference?  After all, you'd still have the GM move Use up their resources, and you HP are really nothing more than a resource.

It's entirely possible that I'm just overthinking this, and the "solution" to this "problem" is just learning to "begin and end with the fiction."

Discuss!

Now, for some selected comments from the post:
----------------------------------------------------

Aaron Griffin:  I like the idea of removing it, but you'd need to have some more coaching about "on the fly"/improv monster moves.

In your orc example, I doubt the orc has "hit with sword" as a move. A novice GM with a strict reading of the rules might not understand that the orc can swing that sword even if it doesn't say it.


Me:  I'm actually thinking you would NOT replace it with "attack" moves for monsters.  But rather, any time the monster attacked, it'd be a different GM move that happened to also inflict damage.

E.g. when the orc "makes an attack against you," if I don't have "deal damage," I'd be forced to pick do something like this instead:

Use a monster move >> the orc's Fight with abandon : "So, you like run it through, but it doesn't seem to notice. It just pushes itself onto your blade, hacking at you and your shield over and over with that vicious meat cleaver thing, scoring a number of blows before it expires. Take d6+2 damage and your blade is stuck right in the thing's gut. What do you do?"

Reveal an unwelcome truth:  "You gut the orc, but he scores a scratch on your arm, not a big deal but holy shit does it burn, take a d6+2 damage. And you're like, uh oh, what's that greenish oil coating this dead orc's blade?"

Use up their resources: "You slash it across the chest, and it reels back, then follows up with just this reign of blow after blow. Take a d6+2 damage and your shield is just in splinters, it hauls back for another chop, what do you do?"

Separate them:  "So, yeah, you run the orc through as it leaps at you but its momentum carries it into you, knocking you down the ravine in a tumble. Take d6+2 damage and you land in a heap, a dead orc on you, the fight up top.  Ovid, you see the Hawke and the orc go tumbling off the cliff and another one comes swinging at you, what do you do?"

Put someone in a spot: "Oh, yeah, you totally slice this orc's throat open and goes down in a gurgle, but the other two rush in on you and hack away, take d6+3 damage (+1 cuz of the extra one, right?). And they keep reigning blows on you, herding you back toward the pit, it's just a few feet away, what do you do?"

Etc. etc.

I.e. there's no replacement for the "Deal Damage" move, no general monster moves like "stab them."  So whenever a foe makes an attack, the GM must make a different GM move, one that makes no sense unless you begin and end with the fiction.

----------------------------------------------------

Greg Soper:  I really like this. I think that there should still be references to damage, but just push it through the general-Damage dice lens (scrapes and bruises = 1d4, etc). So GMs can still be liberal with dealing damage, but just as a result of other moves, and never just as an automatic response to a 7-9 Hack & Slash or a missed Defy Danger.

Me:  oh, I still think there's a lot of value in having distinct Damage values for monsters. It's part of what establishes the "difficulty" of fighting (e.g.) orc bloodwarrior (d6+2) vs. an orc berserker (d10+5!!!).  

----------------------------------------------------

Wright Johnson:  I think the problem with deal damage is actually the name.  As you said, the move itself is the only one written purely in the language of game mechanics.  Inflict harm as established is not a phrase which rolls off the tongue outside the context of Apocalypse World, but it's also consistent with the mannered way the rest of the AW game text is written.  DW is written in natural, conversational English, so the shift into purely mechanical jargon stands out.  If the move was called something like hurt them, I think it might be less jarring.

Asbjørn H Flø:  That was my first instinct too​, with that exact wording. Making hacks and rule changes strikes me as too much work, but rewording it to hurt them opens it up sufficiently to remind you to consider the fiction and your options.

Jason “Hyathin” Shea:  Aside from removing the option entirely (a valid solution, IMO) hurt them is a great option. As I've been reading comments that phrase has been rattling around my head, and it leads me to say, "okay, so how am I going to hurt them?" I don't think that way when I read "deal damage."

----------------------------------------------------

There were also a number of comments around the idea of introducing versions of AW's Suffer Harm player move, discussion of Paul Taliesen's A Descriptive Damage Hack for Dungeon World, and so forth.

----------------------------------------------------

In the end, I've replaced Deal Damage with Hurt Them in my Dungeon World hacks, along with these instructions to the GM: 

When you make a GM move that involves someone getting banged up, knocked around, hurt, or injured, then deal damage as part of that move. If the damage is caused by an established danger, deal damage per its stats. Otherwise, what would it do to a normal person?

• Bruises & scrapes; pain; light burns d4  
• Nasty flesh wounds/bruises/burns d6  
• Broken bones; deep/wide burns d8  
• Death or dismemberment d10

Debilities are ongoing states reflecting the tolls the characters have taken. Inflict them as (or as part of) a GM move. They are:

• Weakened: fatigued, tired, sluggish, shaky (disadvantage to STR and DEX)
• Dazed: out of it, befuddled, not thinking clearly (disadvantage to INT and WIS)
• Miserable: distressed, grumpy, unwell, in pain (disadvantage to CON and CHA)

Debilities might also cause someone to Defy Danger to do things that are otherwise safe.

Yes, those are different debilities than core Dungeon World. That's a post for another time.

New Inventory System for Stonetop

NOTE: This has been updated on July 23, 2019 to reflect simplifications to the system. I've been playtesting it as described below for a few months... we've got like 8 or 9 sessions under our belts with this system.  

I'm still not completely happy with it, and am seriously considering changing it to something more like the current version of Homebrew World. But as I noodle on that, I wanted to update this for reference.  

I've spent the last few weeks updating Stonetop to use a new inventory system.  Here's the new system at a glance:

And here's the detailed explanation.

Outfit

When you prepare for an expedition, decide if you’re carrying a light, normal, or heavy load—this tells you how many slots (□) you have available. Fill slots with items you know you want to bring, from...

• Your possessions
• Your steading’s Prosperity list (or lower)
• Trade & Barter (if you have time)

In each blank, available slot, write a “?”. You can Have What You Need to fill it in later.
Tell the GM what you’re bringing, and answer their questions about your gear and where you got it. 

This move mostly takes the place of going shopping before an adventure. The players choose the level of load they intend to carry, define as much of their inventory as they want, and leave the rest of their inventory undefined with "?" instead of specific items. During the expedition, they can use the Have What You Need move to replace a "?" with specific items (see below).  

A character’s load can be:

•   Light: 3 inventory slots.  Easy to move about, quick and quiet.
•   Normal: 6 inventory slots. Weighed down; they tend to make noise. 
•   Heavy: 9 inventory slots. Noisy, hot, slow, quick to tire. 

Some playbook moves interact with load (for example, the Fox’s Catlike move reads “When you carry a light load and move with care, you make no noise.”) Beyond that, there are no explicit mechanical penalties or benefits related to a character’s load. Use the load to inform the fiction and your GM moves. “The slope is steep and somewhat treacherous, but there are plenty of handholds. You can clamber up it, but anyone carrying a normal or heavy load will be Defying Danger for sure. What do you do?” 

Players track their load and current gear on the Inventory insert. After Outfitting, it might look like this:

Most items (like a bow, a quiver of arrows, a cloak) are "□" and take up one inventory slot. "Big □□" items (like a roll-up sledge) take up two slots. Small items (like a dagger or a magical charm) don’t take up any slots, but be reasonable. 

When choosing items, players can pick items from either:

• Their personal possessions. This includes things that they got during character creation (assuming they still possess them) and items that they acquire through play (as loot, as gifts, via Trade & Barter, etc.).
• The gear lists matching their steading’s Prosperity or lower. Stonetop starts as a Poor steading, which means at the start of play, players can pick from the Poor or Dirt lists. These lists represent items that are commonly available throughout the steading, things that any household might have or that can readily be borrowed or traded for. 

Here's are the Prosperity lists, for reference. Remember, Stonetop starts as Poor, so only the first two columns are freely available. 

As for possessions, each playbook starts with a small number of special possessions. For example, here's the Marshal's choices: 

PCs also acquire possessions through play, as loot or gifts, by using Trade & Barter (see below), etc.

If there’s something else that a player knows they want to bring on an expedition (something not on the steading's Prosperity List and that they don't already possess), they can Trade & Barter for it as part of Outfitting. This takes time, though!  If the players are in a rush, they might not be able to Trade & Barter more than once, or even at all.   

If a character loses, discards, or expends an item during an expedition, they remove it from their inventory. That space is now free. If they pick something up, remind them to add it to their inventory (and tell them if it’s "□", "big □□" or "small"). A player can absolutely increase their load by picking up new stuff (e.g. go from a normal load to a heavy one), but they don’t get to retroactively put [?] icons in the unused spots; they only get to do that when they Outfit.  

If a follower is joining the PCs on an expedition, then they make this move, too. Have the “leader” character set the follower’s load and populate any slots that need populating. 

Have everyone declare their load and announce any specific items they are carrying. Ask pointed questions about the gear they’re bringing. Frame little scenes, too. Use this move to show what NPCs think of the PCs. Maybe the blacksmith gives the Would-be Hero a new dagger as a sign of respect. Maybe the party’s provisions came from the missing boy’s kin—packing up a good lunch is the least they can do. 

Rhianna says “Okay, let’s go get us some bears. Me, my crew, Caradoc, Vahid, and Blodwen. Plus Andras, the new kid, to see if he works out. Outfit?”

“Sure,” I say. “Don’t forget, you’ll need warm clothes. And a few sledges, one per Surplus you hope to bring back.”

Rhianna looks at her Inventory sheet. She knows she’ll want her long bow, her arrows, and a warm cloak, all of which are □ items. She considers taking only a light load, but doesn’t want to be caught unprepared. She takes a normal load and puts “?” in three of the slots. She still has an “anti-crinwin charm” and “bronze dagger” in her Small Items, from the previous expedition, and keeps them there. The long bow and crinwin charm are from Rhianna’s personal possessions, and everything else is from the Poor Prosperity list, so there’s no need to Trade & Barter.  

Rhianna also Outfits for her crew. They’ll each carry a normal load, same gear as her: bows, iron arrows, and cloaks, with three undefined (“?”) slots. 

“What about sledges?” someone asks.  

They're big □□ items, so they take up two slots. Rhianna says that she and her crew are probably carrying them, but they've got plenty of undefined slots; they can figure that out later.

The other PCs Outfit, too. Blodwen takes a normal load, with thick hides and furs (1 armor, warm, crude, big □□) and a staff (close, crude, □). She can’t put the hides and furs in the “Light” slots, so she puts these items in the “Normal” slots and fills the Light slots with “?”. (She also has her sacred pouch, but it’s small and doesn’t take up a slot).  

Vahid brings a normal load: the Mindgem (big □□), a cloak (□), and four slots with “?”.  He also puts brings his silver dagger (small).  

Caradoc brings a normal load: the same spear (□) and shield (big □□) he brought on the last expedition, his lantern (□), a cloak (□), and one “?”. This is the first time Caradoc has brought a cloak on an expedition, and I feel like exploring that—we know his family is pretty poor. “Where did you get that cloak, Caradoc?”  

“Um… from Morwena, I think.”  

“Oh, totally! She catches you in the square as the crew is gathering. She’s got a bundle under her arm and avoids eye contact. ‘I… I was weaving this for you… before… and, well, the embroidery on the back isn’t done, but if you insist on going out there again… well, you’ll need something warm. So… here.’ And she blushes and shoves it in your arms and runs off.  What do you do?”

Have What You Need

When you decide that you brought something with you, add it to your Inventory in an undefined (“?”) slot (or slots, if it’s big □□). If the item you produce is small, it doesn't take up a slot (but be reasonable). You can only produce items from:

• Your possessions
• Your steading’s Prosperity list (or lower) 
• Trade & Barter (as a flashback, GM's call) 

Whatever you produce, it must be something you could’ve had all along. The GM or any player can veto items that make no sense.

This move lets the players populate undefined ("?") slots in their inventory into specific items. It means that when they Outfit, they don’t have to decide on everything that they’ve brought with them; they determine how much they’re carrying and can define their inventory in the field. 

Small items don’t require that you replace any "?"; they go in the Small Items section of the inventory sheet. The unofficial rule is that can have as many Small Items as they can fit in the box. The official rule is "be reasonable."  

Once they Have What They Need to produce an item, that item is now in their inventory. They can drop it, use it up, break it, give it to someone else, etc.

Regardless of size, this move can only produce items that the character already owns (their possessions) or those found on the gear lists matching their steading’s Prosperity or lower. With your (the GM's) permission, they can retroactively Trade & Barter for stuff via a flashback. 

Ask questions about the stuff they produce. “What kind of provisions did you bring?” “Who did you get that from?” “What made you think to bring that?” You’re not (usually) trying to challenge their decisions; these questions provide texture and help you portray a rich and fantastic world. 

The “veto” clause in the move is there to maintain plausibility. You shouldn’t need to invoke it often, but it means that you can say “no” when a player decides they’ve been carrying a caged chicken (alive, awkward, loud, big) with them while they’ve been sneaking through a silent ruin. It also means you can reveal an unwelcome truth when appropriate, and say things like “Wait, you’re producing a clay pot? Didn’t you tumble down a rocky slope earlier today? I don’t think anything fragile like that would have survived.” (And maybe they plead their case, maybe you roll a Die of Fate, maybe they retroactively Defy Danger with INT to have packed it safely, whatever makes sense.) 

They creep up towards the cave entrance, and peer in. “It’s really dark in there,” I say. “Are you going in blind, or what?” 

Caradoc has his lantern and says he’ll light it. “You have a tinderbox?” He doesn’t, but it’s a small item off the Poor list, so he can Have What He Needs to produce it, no problem. He lights it and hands it over the Blodwen, so that he can wield his shield and spear. 

“I’ll get out my lantern, too” says Vahid. It’s not on his sheet, but it’s one of his starting possessions, and he’s got four slots with “?” in them.  

“Wait, didn’t you smash that thing on the swyn’s face?” asks Blodwn. “Did you get a new one?” She’s right, and he hasn’t. A lantern is on the Moderate list, higher than Stonetop’s current prosperity, so he can’t just declare that he has one. 

“Could I Trade & Barter for one? As a flashback?” asks Vahid. It’s a reasonable request; I ask him who he’d have asked. “Oh, like a merchant passing through town? Or maybe Braith, from the public house?” Makes sense, so he rolls +Fortunes for Trade & Barter, but the dice are against him and he gets a 6-. No lantern for him!  “Guess I’ve packed some torches, then.”  He erases the “?” from one of his slots and writes down “Torches (3 uses, area, reach, dangerous).” He also adds a tinderbox to his Small Items section, and lights one of the torches.

...

They finish butchering the bears and Rhianna's like "so, how much did we get?"  I tell them this is probably worth 3 Surplus, if they can get it all home, and I remind them that they'll need one sledge per Surplus. 

Rhianna and each member of her crew are hauling a normal load. They've each got a long bow, a quiver of arrows, and a cloak, plus three "?" slots. Sledges are big □□, so each one takes up two of those "?" slots.  Rhianna adds the "Roll-out sledge" to her own inventory, and then notes that Lowri and Eira each brought a sledge. They've each got one "?" slot left, and the rest of her crew still have three "?" slots. No problem. 

... 

Things don't go so well getting home, and they end up having to camp overnight in the Great Wood. It's freezing cold, they're exhausted, and they've got three sledges piled high with fresh (well, now rather frozen) bear flesh. On the plus side, they killed a whole bunch of crinwin about an hour ago, so hopefully they don't have to worry about them. 

Rhianna and her crew are more worried about wolves and drakes. "A fire should keep them at bay," says Rhianna, "and let's face it, we need one to keep warm."   

They're in the Great Wood, but it's the middle of a deep, snowy winter so any wood they'd be able scavenge would be wet and terrible for burning. "Firewood (big □□)" is on the Dirt Prosperity list. Rhianna Has What She Needs and uses one of her crew member's "?" slots to produce it.  "Let's say that Harri was carrying half, and Aled had the other half" A big item (like firewood) would normally fill two slots from someone's Inventory, but I'm fine with her splitting it up between two of her followers—it's firewood. 

"How do you get the fire lit?" I ask. "Does anyone have a tinderbox?" Caradoc has one from earlier, and soon enough, they've got a fire going.

But even so, it's going to be a long, cold night.  

Trade & Barter 

TRADE & BARTER

When you wish to acquire stuff in your home steading, you can freely buy, trade, or borrow anything from the current Prosperity list or lower. For example, if the steading is Poor, you can freely acquire Poor or Dirt items. 

If you want something else, tell the GM what you're after. If it might be available in town, roll +Fortunes: on a 10+, it’s available for a fair price or a good reason; on a 7-9, it's available, but the GM picks 1:

• It'll take some convincing on your part
• It's someone you really don't want to ask
• It's not quite what you were hoping for
• It'll cause bad blood and/or put people out; -1 Fortunes if you acquire it

On a 6-, it's not available and don't mark XP. 

For assets held in common by the steading, you still roll +Fortunes but treat a 6- as a 7-9.

The PCs have ready access to anything on their steading's Prosperity lists. They might not own a thing themselves, but someone has one they can trade for or borrow. Maybe ask them who they get a thing from, or who they'd go see about __, but again, that's just for texture and to flesh out the town.

For stuff that’s not on the steading’s Prosperity lists, you have to decide whether it “might be available” and therefore whether they should roll +Fortunes. In general, an item might be available if any of the following are true:

• They’re looking for coin, up to a purse of silvers
• It’s on the next-higher Prosperity list
• It’s on the steading’s list of assets (e.g. one of the town’s horses, the wagon, etc.)
• It’s something that one of the steading’s neighbors has in surplus and it’s any season other than winter
• It’s something that you’ve already established that a particular NPC has, or obviously would have (e.g. the blacksmith’s anvil)
• You think it’s feasible (even if unlikely) and want to let the dice decide

Make the decision based on your principles. In particular, remember to both be a fan of the characters and to begin and end with the fiction. Be open-minded, but don’t let them roll +Fortunes to acquire things that just don’t make any sense. 

If you decide that something might be available, they roll +Fortunes to see if it is. The steading’s Fortunes represent the confidence, resilience, and good-will of its people. When Fortunes are high, the steading has more to go around and folks are more willing to trade/sell/loan things.  

On a 10+, the PC can acquire the item “for a fair price or a good reason.” If they’re trying to buy it or trade for it, then decide on a fair price (see Coins & Surplus below). If they’re hoping to borrow it, or just acquire it as a gift, then they’ll need to provide a good reason. Sometimes that good reason will be obvious, sometimes they’ll need to come up with it themselves. Either way, you can either tell them who they need to talk to, or ask them to make it up. Play it out in as much detail as you care to.

On a 7-9, the thing they want is potentially available, but there’s a complication.

The easiest choice is “it’ll take some convincing.” Tell them who they need to convince and reveal why (they want too much for it, they hold a grudge, they just don’t want to give it up, etc.). Ask the PC what they do, and play from there. 

If you pick "It's someone you really don't want to ask," the thing that the PC wants is available but getting it involves a conversation the PC would rather not have. This could be fraught and emotional, annoying, or just uncomfortable. "Steel-tipped arrows? Well, Dermos the merchant is in town from Gordin's Delve... you could probably buy some off of him. But, y'know... he was Ennin's brother, and you just know he's gonna ask whether you've seen her. What do you do?" 

If "it's not quite what you were hoping for," then maybe it comes with fewer uses than normal, or maybe there's something wrong with it. Be careful, though, not to turn this into a 6-! If what they want is something from the Moderate list (like a boiled leather cuirass) and you offer them something from the Poor list (like thick hides), then you've basically said "no, that thing isn't available" because they don't need to Trade & Barter to get something off the Dirt list.  Better: offer them what they want, but with a quirk. Maybe the only leather cuirass in town is make of fine drake skin and it'll cost you twice as many silvers as you were hoping to pay. Or maybe your hands on a hound, but it's a vicious mongrel with a bad attitude, not a good dog at all. 

If you pick "it'll cause bad blood and/or put people out," then you're basically telling them "you can get this, but it'll hurt the town if you do." Save this for resources that really do represent a common good: the town's horses or wagon, the tanner's vats or the smith's anvil, etc. 

On a miss, the thing isn't available. No, they can't roll again, at least not until circumstances have changed. It's not available. You can (and probably should) still tell them the requirements, though. "Well, no one who lives in Stonetop has any chainmail or similar heavy armor, but Duilin'll likely be passing through in a couple weeks, and he often has stuff like that. So you could wait. Or, I guess you could head up to Gordin's Delve and get it there."  

For town assets (like the horses, the wagon, etc.), a 6- counts as a 7-9. That stuff is available, it's just a question of whether they can use it free of consequence.

If a PC uses Trade & Barter to buy or trade for something (as opposed to just borrowing or, or getting it as a gift, or commandeering it for the public good), then they should add it to their list of Possessions.

Blodwen has a bad feeling about the bear hunt and would like to bring a healer's kit with her, but that's on the Moderate Prosperity list and she can’t just take one. It’s reasonable that one might be available (Blodwen’s mentor Gwendyl is the town healer), so I tell her to roll +Fortunes. On a 10+, I’d have Gwendyl press the kit into her hands with some snippy remark like “You’d best take this, Danu knows that boy Caradoc is going to need patching up.” 

But Blodwen gets a 7-9. Gwendyl’s the obvious person she’d get the healer's kit from, and I don’t think she’d need convincing nor is she someone Blodwen would want to avoid. I could pick “not quite what you were hoping for” and say she can only get 2 uses instead of the usual 5. But instead, I play up the fact that there’s no Surplus left and folks are getting desperate. “Well, you could a healer's kit from Gwendyl, but her supplies are running thin. If you take it, it’ll clear out her shelves. Others will go without and the town will take -1 Fortunes.”

“Really?” says Blodwen. “We’re only going to be gone for a day. What if I end up not using it? Will we still lose the Fortunes?”  

“Well, you know Gwendyl… it’s not like she’d keep her mouth shut about you taking the last of the town’s healing supplies, even if you do bring it back unused.”

“Ugh. You’re right.” And Blodwen decides not to take the poultice after all. 

Coins & Surplus

The PCs can't produce coin or Surplus using the Outfit or Have What You Need moves.

Stonetop's economy is mostly based on barter and sharing, so coins aren't really important for day-to-day living. Many residents go their entire lives without holding coin. Thus, there's no real need for the players to track individual coins they possess or carry. It's abstracted: "a handful of coppers" or "a purse of silvers." 

If the PCs want or need coin (for example, because they're heading to Gordin's Delver or Marshedge and want to pay for an inn or other services), they need to Trade & Barter for it. Copper and silver might be available in Stonetop (so they can roll +Fortunes) but gold won't be—at least not at the start of play.

Exchange rates are anything but standard, but use the following as a guide:

"Surplus" is a steading-level resource, representing the food, fur, whisky, and other wealth that the town has generated, above and beyond what its people need day-to-day. The steading generates Surplus in summer and autumn, and consumes Surplus in winter. Surplus can also get consumed when the PCs have the steading Pull Together on repairs or construction, or when the PCs trade it (on behalf of the steading) to a merchant or another community.

The PCs eventually return to Stonetop with 3 Surplus of bear meat, which is good for them because the town had none left and they consumed 2 during the winter. When spring breaks forth, they've got only 1 Surplus left.  

Vahid and Rhianna really want to work towards the "Palisade" steading improvement. The first requirement is that they acquire a whole bunch of timber. Cutting down trees in the the Great Woods is off limits because of an old pact with the Forest Folk. "How about we set up a logging camp for a few weeks in the Foothills?" suggests Vahid. "Sure," I say, and we Make a Plan. The requirements are:

• You'll need to wait until most of the tilling and planting is done
• You'll need to borrow the town's horses and wagon
• The steading must Pull Together, taking the rest of spring and costing 1 Surplus (to feed the logging crew)
• You'll risk the crew getting attacked by monsters and beasts in the foothills!

They wait until spring planting is done and then Rhianna tries to borrow the horses and wagon. They aren't her Possessions, so she needs to Trade & Barter and roll +Fortunes. "Crap, a 4."  These are town assets, so that 6- becomes a 7-9.  I tell Rhianna that it'll take some convincing. "There's a lot of grumbling, and while they're objecting to you using the horse and the wagons, you can tell that really, folks are just scared. It's been a while since anyone did a run to the foothills, and with all the troubles lately, well... you know how it goes." So Rhianna calls a general town council and lays out her plans, and Caradoc gets angry and inspires everyone to follow his lead, and eventually folks agree to do it. 

Rhianna's running the show, so she spends the 1 Surplus and rolls to Pull Together (with advantage, because of her Logistics move). She scores a 7-9, chooses to have Fortunes get reduced by 1 but the work gets done without further complications.  Nice.  

Summer comes and they get a 7-9 on Seasons Change. Blodwen is feeling the most content right now, so she rolls for Surplus and generates 2. She then gets a 7-9 on the Fortunes roll. In summer, that means a boon (no threats), and she chooses an unexpected bounty for another 1 Surplus (3 Surplus total). 

The next requirement on the palisade is "an engineer/foreman of moderate skill." We talk it over a bit and decide that Vahid can fill this roll. So that brings them to "supplies worth 1 purse of silver." Now that's not on the Dirt or Poor Prosperity lists, so if they want that, they'll need to Trade & Barter. It's summer, and the kind of supplies they'd need would be things like rope, tools, nails... all stuff they could theoretically get from merchants passing through. I have them roll +Fortunes. 

On a 10+, I'd tell them that, yeah, a merchant from Marshedge comes through in early summer with just what you need, and (looking at the buying power list), she's willing to trade it to the steading for 1 Surplus worth of furs and whisky.

On a 7-9, I'd maybe say that such a merchant was passing through with just what they wanted, but those goods were meant for someone up in Gordin's Delve and it'll hurt business if she doesn't make her delivery. Maybe they can convince her otherwise?

On a 6-, I'd say that the merchants passing through just don't have what the town needs, and if they want to get this palisade going, they'll need to travel to Marshedge to get those supplies (and probably need to haul a cartload of Surplus to do it, unless the PCs can scrape together a purse of silvers between them).