So the podcasts are quite interresting and what brought me here. I like to talk about theory and best practice and whatnot, though and after hearing the +1 FORWARD on Custom Moves got hung up in what everyone there agreed on:
A move should only (negativily) impact the roller. Really? Like really? We, including me as an MC go to the fiction and let choices and rolls affect the characters and NPCs and just goals of the non-rollers. The last time I played a Hardholder it seemed everyone’s choices and rolls negatively impacted my investment and plans for the Hardhold.
Though I agree that it’s shitty to be on the end of all your mates foolish shenanigans, I am of the opinion that it’s often right to let the other players experience the fallout of other rolls. (Especially in Monsterhearts, in my opinion.)
So, am I missing something? Was the podcasters just promoting “Best practice to avoid the 90’s Alpha Players”, or is it the common belief in this community?
I think it depends if you’ve setup the fiction so that consequence makes sense. If you’re all in combat or in a Dungeon in Dungeon World; maybe. If something completely out of nowhere without context happens because you decide to flex a hard move on someone else because your idea of stakes is for anybody to get hurt right now, it’s a bad move/reaction.
It’s pretty hard to say in general just make a move against everyone because genres are pretty different and so are expectations from the fiction you’re emulating because of that. Sometimes it makes sense, sometimes it doesn’t so it’s difficult to codify as technique you use across all PbtA.
I think people fuck up playing some PbtA games because they think all PbtA is universal and they run every PbtA game with these universal notions. Like people who just look at reference sheets and think their system mastery can propel them into making good fiction within any game/genre.
I think it depends if you’ve setup the fiction so that consequence makes sense. If you’re all in combat or in a Dungeon in Dungeon World; maybe. If something completely out of nowhere without context happens because you decide to flex a hard move on someone else because your idea of stakes is for anybody to get hurt right now, it’s a bad move/reaction.
It’s pretty hard to say in general just make a move against everyone because genres are pretty different and so are expectations from the fiction you’re emulating because of that. Sometimes it makes sense, sometimes it doesn’t so it’s difficult to codify as technique you use across all PbtA.
I think people fuck up playing some PbtA games because they think all PbtA is universal and they run every PbtA game with these universal notions. Like people who just look at reference sheets and think their system mastery can propel them into making good fiction within any game/genre.
Also, remember the cost of helping often is that you are implicated by the consequences. That should count for something.
Indirectly, everything that happens should (come to) matter to everyone; one way or another.
Also, remember the cost of helping often is that you are implicated by the consequences. That should count for something.
Indirectly, everything that happens should (come to) matter to everyone; one way or another.
What is a 90’s Alpha?
What is a 90’s Alpha?
In the 90s an Alpha Player was the guy/girl who used their gaming skills to get into and out of trouble and also by non-diegetic means grabbed spotlight and ‘perceived coolness’ (for more non-diegetic perks and added coolness).
Often played well with some, but leaned on a hierarchy around the gaming table.
The Term “Alpha player” is derogatory* and coined from observations around gaming tables, often of the gender-diverse V:tM games. It was hacked by Matthijs Holter in 2007/2008*who gave the (young) convention goers a workshop were they learned good practices to be an inclusice and awesome co-player.
* or something like that, it’s been a while.
**I admit to showing Alpha Player-tendencies in my gaming career :$
In the 90s an Alpha Player was the guy/girl who used their gaming skills to get into and out of trouble and also by non-diegetic means grabbed spotlight and ‘perceived coolness’ (for more non-diegetic perks and added coolness).
Often played well with some, but leaned on a hierarchy around the gaming table.
The Term “Alpha player” is derogatory* and coined from observations around gaming tables, often of the gender-diverse V:tM games. It was hacked by Matthijs Holter in 2007/2008*who gave the (young) convention goers a workshop were they learned good practices to be an inclusice and awesome co-player.
* or something like that, it’s been a while.
**I admit to showing Alpha Player-tendencies in my gaming career :$
I forget the context of this statement…. There had to be some kind of exception acknowledged, no? Like, any move that progresses a clock on a front necessarily affects potentially everybody….
There are definitely times when I’ve used MC moves to affect someone else directly, but like Fraser says, it’s been more in the context where everybody has put themselves in danger by virtue of being in a big melee. I think the best practice for custom moves is to make sure the consequences don’t feel like they’re coming out of left field, and it’s more likely to feel that way for someone who hasn’t even rolled any dice.
I forget the context of this statement…. There had to be some kind of exception acknowledged, no? Like, any move that progresses a clock on a front necessarily affects potentially everybody….
There are definitely times when I’ve used MC moves to affect someone else directly, but like Fraser says, it’s been more in the context where everybody has put themselves in danger by virtue of being in a big melee. I think the best practice for custom moves is to make sure the consequences don’t feel like they’re coming out of left field, and it’s more likely to feel that way for someone who hasn’t even rolled any dice.
We play hardcore. Characters can wreck each other in all imaginable ways.
We play hardcore. Characters can wreck each other in all imaginable ways.
Ultimately, Big Picture, it’s about who controls the narrative. The GM and Players share narrative as default. On a 10+, the player takes control of the narrative for the moment. On a 7-9, the player and the GM continue to share the narrative. On a 6-, the GM takes control of the narrative for the moment.
I like to think of it as Advanced Hot Potato.
It’s not meant to be punitive for a bad roll. It’s about who’s vision of the story gets to become reality.
Ultimately, Big Picture, it’s about who controls the narrative. The GM and Players share narrative as default. On a 10+, the player takes control of the narrative for the moment. On a 7-9, the player and the GM continue to share the narrative. On a 6-, the GM takes control of the narrative for the moment.
I like to think of it as Advanced Hot Potato.
It’s not meant to be punitive for a bad roll. It’s about who’s vision of the story gets to become reality.
So only GM and rolling player is involved in a roll, Joshua Kershaw ?
I absolutely agree that it sucks if another player picks options that only I care about, but Apocalypse World and Monsterhearts surely has “your neighbour” (in both and not the bibilical sense) as theme.
I believe the roll should be punitive for the character, but we all know players pick the vilest options….
So only GM and rolling player is involved in a roll, Joshua Kershaw ?
I absolutely agree that it sucks if another player picks options that only I care about, but Apocalypse World and Monsterhearts surely has “your neighbour” (in both and not the bibilical sense) as theme.
I believe the roll should be punitive for the character, but we all know players pick the vilest options….