# The Gaming Den

Welcome to the Gaming Den.

Skip to content

## Adopting Apocalypse World resolution for other games ?

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply

- Print view

97 posts

- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next

silva
  Duke
  Posts: 2097
  Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:11 am

### Adopting Apocalypse World resolution for other games ?

- Quote

Post by silva » Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:02 pm

I was wondering..
Has someone considered applying the resolution model from AW (success > hard choice > shit happens) to other games ?
Im in love with Runequest 6 right now and cant wait to start a new campaign with it. BUT after we adopted AW for our current Shadowrun campaign the group consensus in that our games got faster, intenser, and focusing on what really matters for us (the in-fiction choices & consequences, instead of math).
Particularly in my case, what bothers me most is the whole spectrum of NOTHING HAPPENS* contained in the old/trad resolution model. Every roll where you get a “fail” (NOTHIN HAPPENS!), is a waste of time and opportunities (and, by the end of a 4 hours session, it amounts to a really significant wasted time).
So, what do you guys think ? Has anyone considered doing this ?
*old/trad resolution model: “critical success > success > fail [NOTHING HAPPENS] > critical failure”.
Top

Mistborn
  Duke
  Posts: 1477
  Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:55 pm
  Location: Elendel, Scadrial

###

- Quote

Post by Mistborn » Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:28 pm

While I have know idea what the fuck your talking about, my gut says that this is a terrible idea.
Also could anyone translate this pretentious fappery into something that doesn't make me want to abandon my dignity and join Tarnowski's band of raving rejects
Top

Prak
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 17329
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Prak » Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:33 pm

I thought Apocalypse World's resolution mechanic was for everyone to get tipsy and have an orgy....
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.

> Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.

> FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.
> You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.

Top

Previn
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 766
  Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:40 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Previn » Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:11 am

Whelp, always curious I went and grabbed a copy. First, there isn't really a mention of the resolution mechanic until page 190. The entire pdf is 303 pages, and there a lot of white space including entirely blank pages, pages with less than 200 words on them, so I'm already skeptical you'd want to take anything from them.
Any who, the resolution mechanic is a 2d6 check + a stat with the final sum determining how good the move is:
6 or less is miss/failure
7+ is a success/hit with 7-9 being week and 10+ being a 'strong' success/hit.
There some extra riders, like a 7-9 while being under pressure isn't really a success, the DM instead screws with you in some way. The example choice is trying to sneak somewhere, getting an 8, and being noticed by some kid watching the camp and being given the choices of either murdering him or alerting the entire camp.
I would not honestly touch that for anything that wasn't basically just MTP, and even then I'd be super leery of getting near it unless I knew the players and GM super well. If you dropped the part about the DM screwing with you it's a pretty basic and uninspired resolution mechanic.
Last edited by Previn on Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

Stubbazubba
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 737
  Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 6:01 pm
  Contact:
  Contact Stubbazubba
  Website

###

- Quote

Post by Stubbazubba » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:38 am

The 4-fold resolution outcomes ("Yes, and" "Yes, but" "No, but" "No, and") is a popular one. It basically means there are two axes of outcome; success/failure, and mitigation/exacerbation. This means your RNG has to have multiple dimensions somehow, or you cop out and just make it all degrees of success/failure.
But I agree with the sentiment that empty failure is less satisfying than content-rich failure. To that end, see the blog post linked to in my sig.
*********
Matters of Critical Insignificance
Top

K
  King
  Posts: 6487
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by K » Wed Apr 03, 2013 4:45 am

If you are just going to MTP up the results of rolls, you might as well not do the rolls.
Top

Whipstitch
  Prince
  Posts: 3657
  Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:23 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Whipstitch » Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:16 am

> Prak_Anima wrote:I thought Apocalypse World's resolution mechanic was for everyone to get tipsy and have an orgy....

I almost think it's the other way around; the goal is to screw people so then they give you presents so then in turn you can afford being tipsy.
Top

Prak
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 17329
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Prak » Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:20 am

I'm pretty sure AW is mostly just Orgy Foreplay.
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.

> Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.

> FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.
> You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.

Top

OgreBattle
  King
  Posts: 6819
  Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am

###

- Quote

Post by OgreBattle » Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:26 am

How exactly is AW foreplay, how is that supported in the game mechanics. I've heard that sex is inevitable int he game, but it hasn't been clarified how exactly it gets there.
Last edited by OgreBattle on Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

Chamomile
  Prince
  Posts: 4632
  Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 10:45 am

###

- Quote

Post by Chamomile » Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:28 am

Having sex is mechanically supported. There are actual mechanics for what happens after you have sex with someone. Also, the creator apparently made the game with the intention that sex would happen on-screen. Other than that, nothing.
Top

wotmaniac
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 888
  Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:40 am
  Location: my house

###

- Quote

Post by wotmaniac » Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:07 am

(though I can't seem to find the quote at the moment -- it's probably somewhere deep in the recesses of the Forge archive) Also, Baker is on record as having said, in effect, that foreplay is often how he actually uses the game himself (it was actually something along the lines of the best sex he has ever had is immediately following an AW session, thus he plays AW a lot).
*WARNING*: I say "fuck" a lot.
"The most patriotic thing you can do as an American is to become filthy, filthy rich."
- Mark Cuban
"Game design has no obligation to cater to people who don’t buy into the premise of the game"
TGD -- skirting the edges of dickfinity since 2003.
Public Service Announcement
Top

Ice9
  Duke
  Posts: 1568
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ice9 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:35 am

The specific AW mechanics have a significant degree of MTP, which may or may not be good for a particular game, but I'm definitely in favor of eliminating null results. Especially systems where there are multiple failure points (you can miss, they can parry, they can soak, and you can just do insignificant damage, for example) that all yield a null result, it's a waste of real time for minimal benefits that I'm increasingly unwilling to tolerate.
Basically the results that actually mean something are:
* You won / got closer to winning
* They won / got closer to winning
* The situation changed
"Nothing happened this round" is not on that list. If stalling for time actually matters, it should be part of one side's victory conditions (or part of the pyrric result).
For tasks that aren't actually opposed, a series of repeated rolls is a bass-akward way to do them. Just fucking use the margin of success to determine how long it took.
There are actually a lot of mechanics that do this. The problem with many is that they don't handle three-way (or more) conflicts very well. If you're willing to make things a bit abstract in terms of timing, you can handle it as a series of oppositions (if A & B independently attack C, and C wins both times, then he gets to shoot both of them in one round). If you want to keep things strictly concrete, it's a harder case (may have to do something like declare all actions first, then determine how to resolve them based on who's involved).
Last edited by Ice9 on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

Mask_De_H
  Duke
  Posts: 1995
  Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:17 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Mask_De_H » Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:25 pm

As has been said, the positive/negative - mitigation/exacerbation axis is popular and a generally effective resolution mechanic. Declaring actions (through MTP) and then resolving based on (narrative) priority is how AW does it, but it requires chunking for anything more than three involved parties acting simultaneously.
Also, getting laid via TTRPGs is totally a thing that happens. Frank's stated that as the main use of oWoD.

> FrankTrollman wrote: Halfling women, as I'm sure you are aware, combine all the "fun" parts of pedophilia without any of the disturbing, illegal, or immoral parts.

> K wrote:That being said, the usefulness of airships for society is still transporting cargo because it's an option that doesn't require a powerful wizard to show up for work on time instead of blowing the day in his harem of extraplanar sex demons/angels.

> Chamomile wrote: See, it's because K's belief in leaving generation of individual monsters to GMs makes him Chaotic, whereas Frank's belief in the easier usability of monsters pre-generated by game designers makes him Lawful, and clearly these philosophies are so irreconcilable as to be best represented as fundamentally opposed metaphysical forces.

> Whipstitch wrote:You're on a mad quest, dude. I'd sooner bet on Zeus getting bored and letting Sisyphus put down the fucking rock.

Top

silva
  Duke
  Posts: 2097
  Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:11 am

###

- Quote

Post by silva » Wed Apr 03, 2013 11:57 pm

Wadda fuck is "MTP" ?

> The 4-fold resolution outcomes ("Yes, and" "Yes, but" "No, but" "No, and") is a popular one. It basically means there are two axes of outcome; success/failure, and mitigation/exacerbation. This means your RNG has to have multiple dimensions somehow, or you cop out and just make it all degrees of success/failure.
> But I agree with the sentiment that empty failure is less satisfying than content-rich failure

Yup, thats exactly what Im talking about here. And nice blog post over there, if a bit on the complex side for me.

> There are actually a lot of mechanics that do this. The problem with many is that they don't handle three-way (or more) conflicts very well. If you're willing to make things a bit abstract in terms of timing, you can handle it as a series of oppositions (if A & B independently attack C, and C wins both times, then he gets to shoot both of them in one round). If you want to keep things strictly concrete, it's a harder case (may have to do something like declare all actions first, then determine how to resolve them based on who's involved).

> As has been said, the positive/negative - mitigation/exacerbation axis is popular and a generally effective resolution mechanic. Declaring actions (through MTP) and then resolving based on (narrative) priority is how AW does it, but it requires chunking for anything more than three involved parties acting simultaneously.

Dont know if I got what you said here, if not forgive me. But wouldnt all this be resolved if we also adopted the AW rule that says "The GM dont play dice, only the players" ? I mean, this would resolve the multiple sides/opponents fights, right ?
Do you think this could work for Runequest (or ther more trad games) ?

> Having sex is mechanically supported. There are actual mechanics for what happens after you have sex with someone.

Yeah, but those mechanics just say what happens after you had sex. You just say "I bang her" and then the lights are out and you wake up in the morning and your class "sex move" say what happened (Eg: the Brainer gets a full brain scan on the partner). Do not confuse it for mechanics of doing sex, as in, "roleplaying the sex". If you think the game is about that, youre full of bullshit.
Top

Parthenon
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 912
  Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 6:07 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Parthenon » Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:37 am

MTP is Magical Tea Party. A game mechanic is MTP if it has no reliable, actual mechanics, and decisions on whether something happens or not are based on the DM deciding on it happening or the group discussing what would happen and agreeing on it happening.
MTP isn't itself a bad thing- you can have a huge amount of fun when playing with MTP rules. But they are insulting when in a game system because any rules in a game should be better than MTP since the MTP system is completely free.
So, if someone is saying that the Apocalypse World system uses MTP, then they are saying that there aren't any real rules for what you can do and how hard it is, but instead it is based on how well you can bullshit the DM. And that this is bad since other games manage to have actual rules for those things and the makers of AW should feel bad for having the same ability to create rules as a 4 year old girl.
Top

Voss
  Prince
  Posts: 3912
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Voss » Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:38 am

> Yeah, but those mechanics just say what happens after you had sex. You just say "I bang her" and then the lights are out and you wake up in the morning and your class "sex move" say what happened (Eg: the Brainer gets a full brain scan on the partner). Do not confuse it for mechanics of doing sex, as in, "roleplaying the sex". If you think the game is about that, youre full of bullshit.

So... the mechanics don't actually resolve the event or action, but instead determine that you wake up in the morning with a case of crotch crickets, and and dictate how you cope with that?
Because that sounds exactly as satisfying as retroactively wiping your own memory every time you have fun.
Last edited by Voss on Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

silva
  Duke
  Posts: 2097
  Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:11 am

###

- Quote

Post by silva » Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:51 am

> So, if someone is saying that the Apocalypse World system uses "MTP", then they are saying that there aren't any real rules for what you can do and how hard it is

So, what youre telling me is: people around here has the habit of defecating through their mouths, since Apocalypse World (nor Dungeon World) has anything to do with that MTP shit.
Thanks for clarifying.
Last edited by silva on Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:51 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top

Mistborn
  Duke
  Posts: 1477
  Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:55 pm
  Location: Elendel, Scadrial

###

- Quote

Post by Mistborn » Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:15 am

> silva wrote:So, what youre telling me is: people around here has the habit of defecating through their mouths, since Apocalypse World (nor Dungeon World) has anything to do with that MTP shit.
> Thanks for clarifying.

No put down that barrel of cocks and listen.
When the system tells Mister Cavern to use his imagination to generate a rules outcome the system is telling you to MTP. Now you can go full retard and say that having lots of MTP is good (spoiler warning: lots of MTP is actually terrible).
So maybe you might want to roll on over to some other forum. The Den is not a place you go to say good things about games even if they are good, and gushing about how much you like terrible games is winning you no friends.
Top

K
  King
  Posts: 6487
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by K » Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:26 am

Apocalypse World has heavy MTP, but some rules. This puts it in the Rules-light category.
For example, let's look at this rule:

> OPEN YOUR BRAIN
> When you open your brain to the world’s psychic maelstrom,
> roll+weird. On a hit, the MC will tell you something new and interesting about the current situation, and might ask you a question or two; answer them. On a 10+, the MC will give you good detail. On a 7–9, the MC will give you an impression. If you already know all there is to know, the MC will tell you that.

The mechanics is the actual roll. The MTP part is where the DM decides what the results are.
Now, compare that to a game like DnD where you might have the ability to use detect evil. The information given has been decided beforehand and the player can rely on this ability when it's relevant.
That being said, Apocalypse World is a terrible system because the MTP in almost every mechanic renders most of the rules into pointless dice-rolling exercises. Rules-heavy games like DnD or Shadowrun have a lot less MTP, so rolling dice means something.
Honestly, the system in AW is little better than "roll some dice, and the DM will tell you if it's big enough," and that is going to draw a lot of contempt from anyone who enjoys actual mechanics and discussions about mechanics. It's going to be a tough sell on most gaming forums.
Top

silva
  Duke
  Posts: 2097
  Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:11 am

###

- Quote

Post by silva » Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:23 am

No.
All AW moves´ consequences must be coherent/plausible to the situation/context at hand. The GM cannot produce shit from his ass. (exactly the same way a GM cant produce shit from his ass in any other rpg really). This is explicit written in the book:

> Page 109, Apocalypse World wrote:Play to find out: there’s a certain discipline you need in order
> to MC Apocalypse World. You have to commit yourself to the
> game’s fiction’s own internal logic and causality, driven by the
> players’ characters. You have to open yourself to caring what
> happens, but when it comes time to say what happens, you have
> to set what you hope for aside.

See ?

> That being said, Apocalypse World is a terrible system because the MTP in almost every mechanic renders most of the rules into pointless dice-rolling exercises. Rules-heavy games like DnD or Shadowrun have a lot less MTP, so rolling dice means something.

Its the opposite, actually. Games like D&D/SHadowrun have a signficant amount of rolls where "nothing happens" / you "swing and miss", while in AW every time the dice hit the table, its a decisive moment. No "You miss. Nothing happens" in AW.
Last edited by silva on Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:31 am, edited 3 times in total.
Top

Voss
  Prince
  Posts: 3912
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Voss » Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:30 am

> silva wrote:No.
> All AW moves´ consequences must be coherent/plausible to the situation/context at hand. The GM cannot produce shit from his ass. (exactly the same way a GM cant produce shit from his ass in any other rpg really)

The mutants (or whatever): are all women.
There are five mutants.
The mutants have rifles.
All of those are coherent/plausible. That isn't in opposition to 'pulled from the ass'.

> > That being said, Apocalypse World is a terrible system because the MTP in almost every mechanic renders most of the rules into pointless dice-rolling exercises. Rules-heavy games like DnD or Shadowrun have a lot less MTP, so rolling dice means something.

> Its the opposite, actually. Games like D&D/SHadowrun have a signficant amount of rolls where "nothing happens" / you "swing and miss", while in AW every time the dice hit the table, its a decisive moment. No "You miss. Nothing happens" in AW.

So... You can't ever fail?
Top

silva
  Duke
  Posts: 2097
  Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:11 am

###

- Quote

Post by silva » Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:33 am

If you fail, shit happens.
The traditional playstyle is, above all else, the style of playing all games the same way, supported by the ambiguity and lack of procedure in the traditional game text. - Eero Tuovinen
Top

Chamomile
  Prince
  Posts: 4632
  Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 10:45 am

###

- Quote

Post by Chamomile » Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:38 am

The Apocalypse World engine is actually pretty nifty for rules-lite stuff. Ironically, Apocalypse World itself is not an especially good implementation of it because of reasons already highlighted. However, Apocalypse World hacks have frequently created better implementations of what is basically the same "6 is fail, 7-9 is mixed results, 10 is success" mechanic, and it works pretty well. Also, I found Apocalypse World was a lot of fun to read even though the results were basically guided MTP.
Top

Voss
  Prince
  Posts: 3912
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Voss » Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:46 am

> silva wrote:If you fail, shit happens.

You just told us that anyone anywhere in the world can pick up a gun and shoot someone in the head with zero percent chance of failure.
I have no idea how you'd reach a failure state, and what 'shit' would happen if you do.
Top

John Magnum
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 826
  Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:49 am

###

- Quote

Post by John Magnum » Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:50 am

His point wasn't that failure is impossible, his point was that dice are only rolled when both success and failure are significant changes to the status quo. So, rolling to attack when a "miss" means that things are left the same as they were before you attacked is out.
-JM
Top
Post Reply

- Print view

Display:
Sort by:
Direction:

97 posts

- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next

Return to “In My Humble Opinion...”

Jump to

- Main
- ↳ About the Gaming Den
- ↳ In My Humble Opinion...
- ↳ I Gave the Mouse a Cookie...
- ↳ In The Trenches
- ↳ It's My Own Invention...
- ↳ MPSIMS