I’m sure this has been asked (and answered) before, but my Google-fu is failing me. What is the reasoning behind the “only one per class in a party” rule? My friends and I are looking at DW and there may be two players that want to play the same class. What’s the harm?
I’m sure this has been asked (and answered) before, but my Google-fu is failing me.
I’m sure this has been asked (and answered) before, but my Google-fu is failing me.
Well, part of it is that if they both play the same class, it takes away from the uniqueness of each of them; you’re no longer THE Wizard, you’re just A Wizard. In addition, you could come up with a story reason (I’ve heard someone talking about how the reason in his game you’re The Fighter is that there’s some archetypal Fighter that’s imbuing you with its energy).
Three things; heritage from AW, niche protection, and archetype. The last comes from the first which I believe came out of the second. You are not A wizard you are THE wizard. There may be others that call themselves wizards but you are the only one that matters at this point in history.
That rule applies only to start-up. The reason – PC clas people are rare. Your fighter is The Fighter; there are maybe 6-12 others in the world, and your PC knows half of them, and likely knows of the other half.
But, if your the GM, do what you want. You bought it, you own it.
Also, keep in mind, there’s not as many choices for a starting level character as they are in AW or MH. Those two fighters are gonna be pretty close to each other, mechanically speaking.
Actually, there should be player agreement on this. The GM is definitely NOT welcome to modify the rules on his own, at my table.
The GM is always modifying the rules. That’s their job. Every single move is a rules-tweak.
Speaking of a move:
When two players want to play the same class, rock-paper-scissors to see who is what and then give the loser a beer and pizza.
It takes the guess work out of printing up playbooks for the first session, one of each!
Alfred Rudzki That is not a part of the agenda, nor the principles, nor the rules.
Making custom moves is a GM option for preparing an “advanced” Defy Danger move.
+Kasper Brohus It sounds like you have this idea of a GM who creates no custom content for their game. Okay, that’s cool and I hope it’s awesome.
I would never have fun in that game.
Alfred Rudzki It’s not a matter of creating custom content. I just refuted that it was the GMs job to modify the rules.
As a GM, I’m not within my right to break the rules, just as the players are not allowed to break them either. You can change the rules if you want, but it’s not anyones job to break the rules.
Custom content is custom content. You can make all that you want of it, and no one is going to condemn you for it. I’ve made a lot of monsters myself, and a few magic items. None of that is modifying nor breaking the rules?
Well said. As a group you can change all you want. As the GM, it’s a big no no. None of this means you can’t create custom content ofc
If you wanted to softly get around this it might be worthwhile to look at the improved default playbooks like The Priest and such. I played as a priest in a game with a cleric and we didn’t step on each others toes at all despite the classes being essentially the same concept.