My group just started playing this great game, but we have a problem and are looking for the answer to a question. On page 131 of the Dungeon World it states this about animal companion:
Choose a base:
Ferocity +2, Cunning +1, 1 Armor, Instinct +1
Ferocity +2, Cunning +2, 0 Armor, Instinct +1
Ferocity +1, Cunning +2, 1 Armor, Instinct +1
Ferocity +3, Cunning +1, 1 Armor, Instinct +2
Choose as many strengths as its ferocity:
Fast, burly, huge, calm, adaptable, quick reflexes, tireless, camouflage, ferocious, intimidating, keen senses, stealthy
Your animal companion is trained to fight humanoids. Choose as many additional trainings as its cunning:
Hunt, search, scout, guard, fight monsters, perform, labor, travel
Choose as many weaknesses as its instinct:
Flighty, savage, slow, broken, frightening, forgetful, stubborn, lame.
Can someone tell me where the definition of the various strengths, trainings, and weaknesses can be found.
Welcome to the Tavern!
There aren’t any definitions for strengths and weaknesses. Those are simply narrative cues that inform the fiction.
If I recall correctly, they’re just tags, and are self-defining. For any with special meaning, check the tags for monsters in the back.
Hi, No definitions.
Strenghts and weaknesses are used when characterizing the animal’s behaviour, and to give the GM something to work on for his moves.
Training is a broad definition of fields of expertise.
When you say “I make my companion do […] as I […] ” you check if the combined action fits in the Training, in which case you trigger the move.
Work with the GM (and expect some questions) to further define the training tags.
Ferocity is used in the Move “Man’s Best Friend.” Also, “Unnatural Ally.” Cunning is used in Command (and the training is relative there). Instinct is also named in Unnatural Ally and Command and the weakness is (should be) fictionally relevant in Command. It is unclear if this “Instinct” is the same as a monster’s “Instinct.” I don’t think it is, but it’s kind of a sloppy double-use of the word in the rules. As for all the individual tags – they are of general fictional use (in helping you decide whether the animal is useful for something or can be trained to do something, such as “guard” the camp). They are not, as far as I can find from searching the PDF, defined. I would add that I have a mild frustration with this bundle of stuff. It has taken me a while to figure out how best to run animal companions. I wish someone would write a short essay on it. 🙂
All the info relevant is on the Ranger playbook.
basically, rule 1 of Dungeon World – if you can’t find a relevant explanation of a thing somewhere, ask the player whose character it is to come up with what seems reasonable to them
Nathaniel Garth – a lot of Dungeon World relies on tags and other simple descriptors. If an Animal Companion has the strengths “burly and tireless” you can work with The Ranger (or whoever) to determine how that takes effect for that animal.
Another character may get a “burly and intimidating” companion in the same game, and burly may manifest differently.
In a different campaign, other players/characters may want to define different interpretations of “burly” that don’t match either that have happened in the first game.
The idea to this is that Dungeon World puts just enough information in front of the players, including the GM, from which to set out and explore a new world. The players are only beholden to the details that they develop in that campaign, and when any of those players go start a different campaign, they’re encouraged (required?) to start over at the basic tags/descriptors all over again and build a new collaboration with their new group.
So, to directly answer your question about where the definitions are: Your group gets to establish any specific definition for a descriptor; it is then on the players, including but not necessarily ONLY the GM, to make a note or otherwise remember for that game/campaign how the group interpreted that definition in that context. This contributes to building an internally consistent world without being beholden to fiction from outside your game table (until and unless the players choose to bring that fiction into the setting during play).
Thanks, I was just wondering if we missed something or read it wrong. Thanks again!!
A lot of stuff in DW works in a similar way; it’s really just shorthand notes to remind players how to narrate things.