Tag: Kasper Brohus Allerslev

How dangerous do my fellow Dungeon World GM’s run their games? I can get a bit uncomfortable making things too dangerous, when I GM, so I tend to go easier on my players than I’d actually like.

I know it differs from group to group, but personally I’d want the players to reach the point, where they are uncertain whether they’ll survive or not. In fact, I would like to be uncertain if the players will survive or not.

It’s not about reaching the 50/50 odds, I just want to feel that there’s at least a possibility that someone might die from this. At what level do you guys keep the “pressure”?

Does there exist a browser based online hex map making tool? It would be nice to create some beautiful maps for campaigns.

If I live in Denmark, what are my options for buying a physical copy of DW?

While Dungeon World assumes that no one knows the setting before campaign start, wouldn’t it be okay for the host of the game to vocalize some assumptions when inviting people?

“I want to host a heroic fantasy adventure campaign, where the players command a magical airship in a steampunkish setting. Want to come along?”

I just wanted to play such a campaign, or one-shot, for a while 😉

Question: How would you people handle being on fire in DW? My wife threw a lantern in the face of a rather dry zombie yesterday, and I regrettably didn’t actually handle it very well, meaning that I only let her deal class damage to it, because I didn’t think straight. I told her so afterwards.

My problem was how to handle the fictional time, because the zombie would eventually burn to a crisp, but it might take a couple of seconds to do so. As everyone knows, a lot can happen in a couple of seconds, and I thus made the terrible decision of not letting it have anything bu a colorful effect. I should have rewarded the initiative.

How would you roll with it?

So, lets talk about gestalt characters. In D&D 3.x gestalt multiclassing was meant to enhance characters for smallish parties of one or two heroes, to compensate them for their lack of versatility. Small parties tend to do that.

I feel that the moves in DW are meant to give the players a way to take control over the story, in ways fitting to their class concepts. Usually this is done by letting the players roll a “better” stat for the roll, or by giving them more say over the outcome.

When you play with a low number of players, like one or two, it is sometimes hard for players to achieve the same amount of leverage, since it’s far more likely that they default to Defy Danger in lack of “better” moves, which actually makes GM’ing harder (more radical improvisation needed).

This made me think of the gestalt rules from D&D 3.x. My idea would be something along the following lines:

– Everyone picks two different classes, no duplicates.

– Each character get the best HP modifier and Damage die from either class.

– Each character gets all starting moves from both classes.

– On level up, each character gets an advanced move from both classes.

I haven’t tried it out, just toying with the idea. Thoughts?

I’ve been reading the rules for Apocalypse World, since my favorite RPG system (guess which) is a derivative of it.

As I read through the book, I notice a lot of things that are really different, such as HP versus harm track, and how stats are handled differently.

I suspect that most of these changes are made to make the game feel more like old school D&D.

However, I still like how AW handles stats more than how DW does. It is not because I am dissatisfied or anything, it just “feels” better.

To be honest, I don’t like the 3-18 stat array from DW, mainly because it feels a lot like a “ability tax” system. If you have 13 in a stat, then you must spend three levels worth of attribute points in order to go from a +1 bonus to a +2 bonus. Anything in between has no tangible effect.

You can’t even compare the stats against monsters since they have none. Each time you want to see if you’re stronger than a monster in some way, you Defy Danger using strength, since this form of stat comparison is unsupported.

Don’t get me wrong, I love the simplicity of monsters, it is not because I wanted them to be more complicated. I just dislike the “tax”.

I might also just be perceiving this the wrong way. Is there something I’m missing here? What is the point of the “in-between” values?

If Adam Koebel or Sage LaTorra would give an answer to this, I’d be most happy, although I suspect it is merely because the stats are a sacred cow to D&D.