Equestria World: Applejack's Infrastructure Adventures

[Ezeze]

I think I'm getting the feeling that you're going for.

It's my first stab at this, so tell me honestly what you think of;

THE SHOPKEEPER
"My Cabbages!"

Core Responsibility: Business

Stats: +2 Generosity, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Shopkeeper moves.

Savings: In the Black 5

Shopkeeper Special: When you date someone else, you may Give them a Gift
* once per season without spending the requisite point of cash.

*Refering to your "give someone a point of cash worth of gifts" move - it counts as doing something nice and hitting on a 10+

Moves:
The Backbone of the Community You may trade any number of points of Barter for an equivalent number of Holds.

Merchants' Guild When you try to make something big happen with money you get a +1 bonus without spending any additional Barter (to a maximum of 4).

Wise Investments You may spend 2 Barter to increase your savings by one. However you cannot benefit from your new, improved savings level until next season.

Hired Help You may offer another player Barter when you attempt to Ask Your Friends for Help. If you do carry 2 on that roll and, if successful, your Friend carries 1 on the next roll made to help you with that specific problem.

Carefully Chosen Gifts When you Help Someone Out you may roll +Generosity instead of +Loyalty

Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable Under some condition (WIP ) you gain access to Do Something Nice and Take The Credit at the same time (ideally, this would allow the shopkeeper to Take the Credit only after they have Done Something Nice, but I can't figure out how to put that into place without making it horribly over powered....)




I tried to make sure The Shopkeeper had a ton of interesting, competing ways to spend Barter and also the ability to increase their Barter faster than anyone else (but not so fast that they dominate by second season).

Of course, this assumes any given game will last multiple seasons....

[Thanqol]

I like these moves much more now. Two things:
- You might consider adding a cost to Help Someone Out 7-9.
- I still don't quite get the last choice in Act Under Pressure.

Will take a look at the playbooks later.

I've got two thoughts on Help Someone Out:
- "But you are exposed to cost or risk", a la HX
- The implicit opportunity cost of setting up and using the move in the first place is sufficient.

Ah that makes some sense. I didn't think of targeting something negative with it, since the other results are positive focused.

Yeah, it's like, this is the move you use to face down a Chimera or make a lot of dresses before the deadline. They're the same category of problem in this system.

Okay, read over the whole thing. A few thoughts.

Edit: Added some lines for readability

The two playbooks look really good. They've got a united theme, and the different moves fit really well together with the actual job of that theme. I like them a lot. By far the most jarring thing to me was that the Guardian's main stat is laughter. If you're sticking with elements, I think that should be Magic. I think you went with laughter because it's the closest to AW's Weird stat, but as that class is described, all their moves actually make more sense to me with Sharp than with Weird and the class seems to be more intellectually focused.

Six stats is too many. Intellectual focus is not a thing. Laughter is the stat that is rolled when you're dealing with a scary situation, which most bad guy fights will come under. As you might notice, none of these classes is a perfect representation of any of the Mane 6 - the Guardian is half Twilight and half Pinkie Pie for example.

The basic moves still seem not quite there. Honesty is obviously the core of the entire setting and I have nothing to add on it. I think loyalty 7-9 should have a negative. Like, instead of reducing your help, you start a new problem. Something like

A new problem is too much. See my earlier thoughts.

Do Something Nice looks solid. I'm actually trying to think of failures around that one. You haven't gotten to MC moves yet, but I'm trying to figure out if the shape of failing a Do Something Nice roll is that you lose significant resources without making any real gain, or is it that you hurt or offend the pony that you're trying to help? Basically, does doing something nice require a sacrifice on your part, or does it rotate entirely around how your actions affect the target?

Failures around Do Something Nice are, like, art of the dress or the Cheese Sandwich episode. Primarily your idea of something nice doesn't mesh with their idea of something nice, or alternately you can't do it without paying a cost or something. I don't think DSN costs resources by default; I think that giving someone a Barter worth of gifts counts as hitting DSN with a 10+.

For Empathize, I'd add one more question: "what do you think will happen if you don't __"

Hmm. That's interesting. Confrontational and perhaps too self aware.

I do think one of the options is off for Acting Under Pressure, but I don't know which way because I can't tell what you want with it. If you want it to be strictly a move used to do tasks and maybe get help for yourself, make it

It's neither of those things. It's act under pressure. Maybe the pressure is a deadline, maybe it's a chimera.

Logically, why does accepting a Responsibility give you the ability to assure others who are doubting you that you can handle it? It seems to me that if somepony thinks you're failing, taking on even more work would be the last thing in the world they'd want to see you doing. You'll just be stretched thinner and have even less time to dedicate to the task where they think you're failing.

Again I'm pretty sure that those holds are going to be tied to the responsibility that generated them.

As far as the Discorded moves, I think you have to offer experience for using them. Or some kind of mechanic that forces their use, like Darkest Self does. If there isn't some kind of forcing effect from the game, the majority of players will simply refuse to touch them. An alternative would be to make it so that use of the Discorded move is the only way to get rid of the Discord effect, and then if the player refuses to touch it, the MC (or other players) can simply dump more and more stuff on that character that really begs for the use of that forbidden move.

Yeah that's what I'm thinking, r.e. the Highlight system.

Anyway, stepping back from the specifics for a second, I think that there's a basic uncertainty in the system between whether the focus in internal vs. external problems. The playbooks, the jobs, the responsibilities, and the types of problems all suggest a game where the focus is about building a life and perhaps a community in the face of scary external problems. I see the Guardian fighting huge monsters while the Farmer does her best to keep the community fed in the face of bad weather, blights, and invasive pests.

On the other hand, the basic moves are all about interpersonal conflict. The core conceit you've developed is that characters cannot, by default, articulate their need for help with their problems. The basic moves are all about ways for ponies to understand and support each other in the face of this one major failing, and the Discorded versions are all ways to get rid of your problems by making things worse for everypony else.

Obviously both kinds of conflicts can and should be present. But I think the question needs to be where the focus goes. Is fighting the Ursa major the thing that I need to be concerned about, and getting some help will make it easier on me? Or is it getting help that's the whole story, and once I have the right friends backing me up, the Ursa Major is just a footnote and maybe a chance for a bit of purple prose?

The focus is on getting the right friends to back you up. Once you have your friends behind you the problem gets resolved automatically. However, the problem is that your friends all have their own problems and dramas and there's not enough time to get everyone's problems sorted out so someone's always going to lose out. So the core question is always, 'Do I do something for my friends even if it costs me personally?'

[Anarion]

Six stats is too many. Intellectual focus is not a thing. Laughter is the stat that is rolled when you're dealing with a scary situation, which most bad guy fights will come under. As you might notice, none of these classes is a perfect representation of any of the Mane 6 - the Guardian is half Twilight and half Pinkie Pie for example.

Mm, I can see that. Maybe work on the fluff there a bit in terms of presentation. Those two playbooks were really solid, and the use of laughter there was the one thing that kind of knocked me out of what I was reading.

A new problem is too much. See my earlier thoughts.

What about, rather than just put them in a tight spot, start the seeds of a new problem? So you don't get an entire new problem just from a partial success, but the difficult situation or tight spot is something that opens the way for a new problem if you leave it alone too long.

Failures around Do Something Nice are, like, art of the dress or the Cheese Sandwich episode. Primarily your idea of something nice doesn't mesh with their idea of something nice, or alternately you can't do it without paying a cost or something. I don't think DSN costs resources by default; I think that giving someone a Barter worth of gifts counts as hitting DSN with a 10+.

Workable. I think perhaps that Do Something Nice could be required to cost a barter if you go too big. Like, if you throw a 30-pony party with full meals and desserts, maybe that's not possible without putting down at least a barter. Like, it's not that it should be a limit on the move, but if what you're doing in-world couldn't reasonably be done for free, you shouldn't be able to do it for free just because you say that you're trying to Do Something Nice.

Hmm. That's interesting. Confrontational and perhaps too self aware.

Hmm, I may have misphrased. I didn't think of it as confrontational necessarily, but rather as a way to get at what consequences the pony is worried about. It's not asking what's actually going to happen, but rather what they're afraid of happening if they don't manage to meet their own expectations.

It's neither of those things. It's act under pressure. Maybe the pressure is a deadline, maybe it's a chimera.

Okay. Question then. Let's say I use it to entertain and inspire my friends in a big public moment. What happens if I pick the surprise/shock/startle option? How do we make that positive in that context? Or alternately, let's say I don't pick that option with my crowd, what am I missing out on?

Again I'm pretty sure that those holds are going to be tied to the responsibility that generated them.

That still doesn't make a ton of sense to me. You've taken it on, they later come to you because they think you're failing and you spend the hold to reassure them. What does that look like IC? Is it just you saying "hey, don't worry about it, I got this thing" and they take your word for it because you have the hold?

Yeah that's what I'm thinking, r.e. the Highlight system.

Cool

The focus is on getting the right friends to back you up. Once you have your friends behind you the problem gets resolved automatically. However, the problem is that your friends all have their own problems and dramas and there's not enough time to get everyone's problems sorted out so someone's always going to lose out. So the core question is always, 'Do I do something for my friends even if it costs me personally?'

Okay, so, if I'm getting it right, the idea is my playbook moves show me where I'm strong and can afford to try stuff without friends, therefore I pick moves with the hope of opening up my time to offer it elsewhere?

[Thanqol]

My idea of the Shopkeeper is slightly different;

Introducing,

THE SHOPKEEPER

"My cabbages!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Business

Stats: +2 Generosity, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Shopkeeper moves

Savings: In the black 5

Shopkeeper Special: Once per season, you can Do Something Nice for the person you're dating and automatically succeed at a 10+.

Moves:

Luxury Goods: When you spend the season working for someone else, roll +generosity instead and if you are successful add 1 Barter in addition to the other rewards.

Product Placement: After you have successfully Done Something Nice for someone struggling with a Problem, you can roll to Claim The Credit for the outcome of that Problem if it is resolved within the same season.

Gathering Inspiration: When you spend the season travelling you can roll +Generosity rather than +Barter

Universal Appeal: You can Do Something Nice even for the most fearsome or antisocial monsters.

Market Research: When you want to know something about someone important (your call), roll +Generosity. 10+ ask three, 7-9 ask one.
* How are they doing? What's up with them?
* What or whom do they love best?
* Who do they know, like or trust?
* Who do they think is the most important person in this room?
* When should I next expect to see them?
* What are they saying about me behind my back?

Good Karma: Add the following option to the Do Something Nice list:
- They'll help you out whenever you next need it.

[Thanqol]

Workable. I think perhaps that Do Something Nice could be required to cost a barter if you go too big. Like, if you throw a 30-pony party with full meals and desserts, maybe that's not possible without putting down at least a barter. Like, it's not that it should be a limit on the move, but if what you're doing in-world couldn't reasonably be done for free, you shouldn't be able to do it for free just because you say that you're trying to Do Something Nice.

The consequence of that is that if you miss the roll then you've done f*cked up son and the MC's retaliatory Hard move will be all the Harder. The Barter isn't the big option, it's the safe option.

Okay. Question then. Let's say I use it to entertain and inspire my friends in a big public moment. What happens if I pick the surprise/shock/startle option? How do we make that positive in that context? Or alternately, let's say I don't pick that option with my crowd, what am I missing out on?

Perhaps you have a rival across the way from you who's mind you totally blow by how hardcore you look while taking down that Ursa Minor.

That still doesn't make a ton of sense to me. You've taken it on, they later come to you because they think you're failing and you spend the hold to reassure them. What does that look like IC? Is it just you saying "hey, don't worry about it, I got this thing" and they take your word for it because you have the hold?

This move needs full revisiting I think.

Okay, so, if I'm getting it right, the idea is my playbook moves show me where I'm strong and can afford to try stuff without friends, therefore I pick moves with the hope of opening up my time to offer it elsewhere?

Kind of, yeah?

[Anarion]

Kind of, yeah?

This might be weird, but the vibe I'm feeling from all this is sort of like playing a game of Agricola.

Edit: Also, the shopkeep looks really solid. I continue to feel like the playbooks are doing a really strong job on their theme and are looking exciting.

Capitalism, Ho!

[Amechra]

I wonder why the "sex moves" are based off dating and not being best friends with someone.

One of those feels more appropriate than the other.

[Thanqol]

I wonder why the "sex moves" are based off dating and not being best friends with someone.

One of those feels more appropriate than the other.

Because shipping.

Also it's important to the Assistant in particular.

[Madcrafter]

I wonder why the "sex moves" are based off dating and not being best friends with someone.

One of those feels more appropriate than the other.

Because otherwise a lot people won't make their ponies date each other, leading to a chronic lack of shipping. And bad things happen when there is a lack of ships.

EDIT: Oyoo, ninjas

[SiuiS]

The two playbooks look really good. They've got a united theme, and the different moves fit really well together with the actual job of that theme. I like them a lot. By far the most jarring thing to me was that the Guardian's main stat is laughter. If you're sticking with elements, I think that should be Magic. I think you went with laughter because it's the closest to AW's Weird stat, but as that class is described, all their moves actually make more sense to me with Sharp than with Weird and the class seems to be more intellectually focused.

Giggles and ghosties.

For Empathize, I'd add one more question: "what do you think will happen if you don't __"

So, what fears or doubts plague you?

Logically, why does accepting a Responsibility give you the ability to assure others who are doubting you that you can handle it? It seems to me that if somepony thinks you're failing, taking on even more work would be the last thing in the world they'd want to see you doing. You'll just be stretched thinner and have even less time to dedicate to the task where they think you're failing.

No, man, think about it. It's brilliant.

You have three dots of resources. You have people heckling you. You can A) ignore hecklers and have three dots or B) shut them the hay up and be drained slightly and have only two dots.

It's not about "hey guys, I'm having trouble so I'm totally able to handle this!" It's "yeah, hehe, I got this, don't worry, don't need me no help" and having a harder time at cost of not dealing with social burdens.


Thanqol, consider letting the discarded moves be free but highlight not only the move but also reinforce a penalty (they already do, but for posterity). Like, you can take shortcuts and be pragmatic and efficient but nobody likes you. You have to balance beig right and being liked.

[Anarion]

So, what fears or doubts plague you?

Yeah that's a good phrasing of it.

No, man, think about it. It's brilliant.

You have three dots of resources. You have people heckling you. You can A) ignore hecklers and have three dots or B) shut them the hay up and be drained slightly and have only two dots.

It's not about "hey guys, I'm having trouble so I'm totally able to handle this!" It's "yeah, hehe, I got this, don't worry, don't need me no help" and having a harder time at cost of not dealing with social burdens.

It's specifically an NPC move though (unless I heavily misread it). You're not dictating to a player that you have it handled, that would be a failed honesty roll. You're dictating to the universe that it should leave you alone. Which I just can't wrap my mind around in terms of how that plays out in action.

There's something there though. I think it's trying to get at the distinction between showing the initiative vs. having something demanded of you. When one steps up and takes on a project, she get to own it, do it the way she wants. When somebody else forces a project on a person, that person is subject to the demands and the rules of the person giving the orders.

[SiuiS]

It's specifically an NPC move though (unless I heavily misread it). You're not dictating to a player that you have it handled, that would be a failed honesty roll. You're dictating to the universe that it should leave you alone. Which I just can't wrap my mind around in terms of how that plays out in action.

There's something there though. I think it's trying to get at the distinction between showing the initiative vs. having something demanded of you. When one steps up and takes on a project, she get to own it, do it the way she wants. When somebody else forces a project on a person, that person is subject to the demands and the rules of the person giving the orders.

I don't know what you mean by NPC move. My reading is that as a player, you can tak on responsibility and either A) get three dots and have people hound you or gain two dots and no hounding.

"But what about situations where nopony hounds you?"

Those by default give only two dots. The move itself creates the rule wherein versions free of outside heckling are own one dot. It is just phrased in a way that can be applied to other players too, if their interference is soppig you somehow.



That's missing though. So far, I'm not seeing anything that strains players between players at all. Nowhere in the game is there a reason to say "gee, I'm sorry Twi, but I promised RD I would help her, and I also have to buck all these apples." I mean, implicitly there's an unspoken and not explicit time limit to catastrophes, but that's all.

Maybe these +1 forwards can only be used on other pony's projects. That forces team work and bartering because it's the only way to get stuff done on your bad stats. You promise them a +1 forward from your stuff. Maybe you back out? That would be interesting. Maybe you can't because you get there and then roll poorly, suddenly getting consequences.

Thanqol?

[Anarion]

By NPC move, I meant that it's used on NPCs. You're not spending hold to tell other PCs how they feel about your Responsibility, you're spending it to dictate the general attitude of NPC ponies. I think at least.

[TheAmishPirate]

A sudden pre-bedtime thought; if Princess isn't working, what about something like a Matriarch/Patriarch? Not a pony in any official office, but one so familiar with the town that there isn't a soul they haven't shared a deep conversation with. The sort that can inspire shame with the slightest look, or beckon mortal enemies to the same table with a word. Theirs is a subtle, solid power, and this town would squabble itself to death without them.

I figure if this is supposed to be a small town setting, Princesses don't usually hang about such places.

[SiuiS]

By NPC move, I meant that it's used on NPCs. You're not spending hold to tell other PCs how they feel about your Responsibility, you're spending it to dictate the general attitude of NPC ponies. I think at least.

Hmm. Okay. I don't see why this strikes you as weird, then. Is it an idea that the DM doesn't have as much of a concrete stake in making the player's life miserable in X fashion?

[Thanqol]

^ Will think about this for a while before responding ^

Introducing,

The Assistant

"I'd never leave my friends hanging!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Personal

Stats: +2 Loyalty, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, get Devotion and one other Assistant move.

Savings: Treading Water 3

Assistant Special: When you date someone they count as an additional Devotion.

Moves:

Devotion: Choose one of the other player characters to be the subject of your Devotion. You gain +1 to any roll that has to do with your Devoted.

The Crush: When you have a crush on someone then they count as an additional Devotion. You can have as many crushes as you want but they have to be fairly important to you in order to continue mattering. The Crush does not have to be romantic.

Love And Hate: You may always use both the Loyalty moves on your Devoted.

Shoulder To Cry On: When your Devoted tells you about their problems, roll +Loyalty to help them:
10+: They erase one of their Problems and you choose one
- Mark XP
- Take 1 forwards
- They transfer one of their Responsibilities to you.

7-9: They choose 1
- They erase one of their problems
- They transfer one of their Responsibilities to you.

Last Resort: Each Season you always count as having stocked additional supplies and provisions in addition to anything else you did.

Guardian Angel: Whenever your Devoted is in any kind of physical danger you are always there to save them.

[Ezeze]

Product Placement: After you have successfully Done Something Nice for someone struggling with a Problem, you can roll to Claim The Credit for the outcome of that Problem if it is resolved within the same season.

This is pretty much exactly what I was going for with the Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable power.




I don't have a full The Mayor penned out, and it's almost 2am so I'm not going to do it tonight, but I'm thinking she should have something like;

Special: In The Public Eye. Whenever anyone get credit for solving a problem, you get half as much credit; this does not subtract from the amount of credit the other person gets. Whenever anyone is blamed for a catastrophe, you get an equivalent amount of blame; this does not subtract from the amount of blame the other person receives.

[Thanqol]

This is pretty much exactly what I was going for with the Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable power.


I don't have a full The Mayor penned out, and it's almost 2am so I'm not going to do it tonight, but I'm thinking she should have something like;

Special: In The Public Eye. Whenever anyone get credit for solving a problem, you get half as much credit; this does not subtract from the amount of credit the other person gets. Whenever anyone is blamed for a catastrophe, you get an equivalent amount of blame; this does not subtract from the amount of blame the other person receives.

I would like to do the Playbooks myself. I've got pretty clear ideas on each of them, and on what makes a good Playbook. I'm much more interested in feedback and analysis of the mechanics. Any thoughts on how Responsibilities are handled mechanically would be especially welcome because that's the big topic of contention right now.

[Thanqol]

Introducing,

The Entertainer

"I am the GREAT and POWERFUL TRIXIE!!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Stage

Stats: +2 Laughter, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, choose 2 Entertainer Moves

Savings: In The Black 5

Entertainer Special: When you date someone else, if they don't turn up to one of your performances take -1 ongoing until you next talk to them.

Moves:

Get The Band Together!: You can link up any number of other people in music regardless of their individual talents, rehearsals, sheet music or any of that nonsense.

Light That Shines Within: When you're going all out while performing to a crowd, roll +laughter. On a 10+ hold 3, 7-9 hold 1. Spend your hold one for one to make the crowd:
- Burst into uninhibited emotional displays
- Focus on the music to the exclusion of all else
- Have the greatest time of their lives
- Forget what they were talking about just before the show started
- Put aside their differences temporarily while performing a task

If your Laughter is reversed you may also choose from this list:
- Scam them out of their money
- Boo and heckle your competitors

Bass Cannon: You have access to some serious business piece of entertainment hardware, like a one man band, party cannon, Sonic Rainboom, etc. You detail.

Upstage!: You are immune to any attempt to Take The Credit or otherwise overshadow your contribution.

Reputation: When you meet someone for the first time, if you decide they've heard of you roll +laughter.
10+: You decide what they've heard of you and you take +1 forwards with them
7-9: You decide what they've heard about you.
On a miss the MC decides what they've heard about you.

Exit, Stage Left: When a great magician has to leave the scene she does so with style. Roll +laughter:
10+: You're gone, with style.
7-9: You're gone, but not without embarrassing yourself somehow

[Anarion]

Playbook thoughts later.

Hmm. Okay. I don't see why this strikes you as weird, then. Is it an idea that the DM doesn't have as much of a concrete stake in making the player's life miserable in X fashion?

The idea in a *world game is that everything you do is reflected IC and when you do the IC thing, you have to roll the dice (or spend hold or whatever). Most of the moves that give hold represent that hold as the fruits of an interaction. You read a person and ask questions because you had/are having a conversation with them that gives you insight into what they're thinking. You can roll the move before talking, but you can't spend your hold without the conversation.

My issue with responsibilities is that I'm finding it challenging to wrap my brain around what the hold represents. As written, it makes a connection between taking responsibility and your ability to fail or reassure others about that responsibility. That's not really how it works, though. Usually you take a responsibility and people leave you alone. If they're coming to you with concerns, you can't effectively reassure them because you took on the responsibility before they were concerned. You instead rely on their trust of you as a person and how reliable they believe you to be.

Now, I do think there's a distinction between tasks that you volunteer for and tasks that are forced upon you. So something like the following might work if we want to avoid changing the structure of the move.

Responsibility
When you volunteer for a task, hold 3. If it's forced upon you, hold 1. You may spend your hold 1 for 1 to
-reassure someone that your way of handling the problem is the right one
-ask someone for additional resources needed for the responsibility
-Stay in charge after a setback

The idea being that when you choose to undertake something, you're really the one in charge, you get to handle the project the way you want because you stepped up to do it and everyone consented to that. When you're given an order, you're not really the one in charge. You're handling it, but somebody else is the one really pulling the strings and they can give you a pretty short leash if they don't like what you're doing.

[Ezeze]

I would like to do the Playbooks myself. I've got pretty clear ideas on each of them, and on what makes a good Playbook. I'm much more interested in feedback and analysis of the mechanics. Any thoughts on how Responsibilities are handled mechanically would be especially welcome because that's the big topic of contention right now.

Understood.



... I think perhaps a better word for "Hold" - at least, as I understand it - would be "Reputation" or even "Influence," but I'll use "Hold" for now to prevent confusion.


That in mind, I think it might be better to not give out Hold/Reputation when a task is accepted, but rather when it is completed. I propose the following;

In addition to belonging to one of eight groups, all Responsibilities are one of two types; either Projects or Commitments. Projects and Commitments are different in that a Project is short-term, completable, and easy to both take on and discharge.

For example, a Project might be; fixing a bridge, repelling an invasion or planning a party. At the heart of every Project is the Problem "(Project) is not Finished Yet." You cannot solve this Problem until all of the other Problems associated with it have been resolved. Once a Project is resolved, the Pony who resolved it is rewarded (Some combination of Hold, Experience, increased Savings Level, assured help in the future, or something else depending on player choice or GM choice or even what kind of project it was).

A Commitment might be; taking care of a younger sibling, running a shop, being a good student, being a good friend or protecting the town from magic. Unlike Projects, Commitments need not necessarily have a Problem associated with them at any given time, but when a Commitment does create a Problem it's automatically the Problem of whoever made that Commitment. Every Pony must have at least one Commitment related to their Playbook at all times. Ponies are rewarded for their Commitments at the end of every Season, with penalties that subtract from that reward for every unresolved problem.

Problems are created any time anypony fails a roll (though it won't necessarily be a problem for the pony who failed the roll), and also according to GM discretion.

The idea is here is that Responsibilities have predictable rewards, but unpredictable problems - meaning taking on a Commitment is always a gamble, and the system is subtly rigged to encourage PCs to over-extend themselves. Notice, too, that you don't get rewards of any kind for solving Problems. Nopony but you cares about how problematic a Responsibility is, they only care whether or not you can come through on your end. Under this system Catastrophe timers would have to be tied to Problems and not Responsibilities, but I think that makes more sense anyways...



Under this system, Useful Lies could be changed from giving someone else your Responsibility to giving someone else your Problem.



Any time anypony fails a roll, the GM should do one of the following;
Create a new Problem in regards to a Project.
Create a new Problem in regards to a Commitment.
Create a new Project.
Make an existing Problem worse.

[Anarion]

That's a pretty harsh set of roll failures Ezeze. To compare, in AW, roll failures can involve the PC getting killed or taking serious harm, but in other contexts, a roll failure is only an announcement of something off in the distance, an opportunity to ask a probing question, or even a chance for an NPC to join up with one of the PCs and ask for help.

I think every roll having such huge potential consequences might be discouraging to the players. You ultimately want them to roll and have the successes and partial successes escalate into interesting drama, not make rolling so scary that they never want to do it.

[Ezeze]

That's a pretty harsh set of roll failures Ezeze. To compare, in AW, roll failures can involve the PC getting killed or taking serious harm, but in other contexts, a roll failure is only an announcement of something off in the distance, an opportunity to ask a probing question, or even a chance for an NPC to join up with one of the PCs and ask for help.

I think every roll having such huge potential consequences might be discouraging to the players. You ultimately want them to roll and have the successes and partial successes escalate into interesting drama, not make rolling so scary that they never want to do it.

I see your point! The idea there, though, was to tie the generation of problems to something other than GM discretion, but neither put in a ton of extra numbers and tables to keep track of nor made it so that you could set your clock by when problems happened; in essence to give the occurrence of problems the appearance of randomness while still giving the GM guidelines within which she can work.

In a related vein, I notice that while the general idea of the game seems to be that there simply isn't enough time to deal with everyone's problems, so PCs must jockey amongst themselves to get their problems attended to so they can collect the ensuant rewards. We're putting problems and rewards in place, and we have time limits in the form of Catastrophe timers, but we don't have anything in place dictating a minimum amount of time for solving problems to take. Standardizing the number of workable hours in a day across games would go a long way to keeping difficulties consistent, which helps with power balancing.

In addition to making sure there is room for PCs to have fun, we also have to think about these things from the perspective of handing over the reigns to GMs who haven't participated in these discussions

[SiuiS]

Playbook thoughts later.



The idea in a *world game is that everything you do is reflected IC and when you do the IC thing, you have to roll the dice (or spend hold or whatever). Most of the moves that give hold represent that hold as the fruits of an interaction. You read a person and ask questions because you had/are having a conversation with them that gives you insight into what they're thinking. You can roll the move before talking, but you can't spend your hold without the conversation.

My issue with responsibilities is that I'm finding it challenging to wrap my brain around what the hold represents. As written, it makes a connection between taking responsibility and your ability to fail or reassure others about that responsibility. That's not really how it works, though. Usually you take a responsibility and people leave you alone. If they're coming to you with concerns, you can't effectively reassure them because you took on the responsibility before they were concerned. You instead rely on their trust of you as a person and how reliable they believe you to be.

I think you're taking it too linearly, myself. Sticking with the hold mechanic because it's familiar and is already used elsewhere in the game, this is just "take a responsibility. You can either get two points of hold, or three but people are heckling you". The sum total is the same whether you view it as gaining three points and maybe spendig one, or choosing between two or three points.

That nonlinear equivalency is what makes this work for me.


Also, apologies Ezeze. I don't want to ignore you or anything but you are just talking about the rules at a more concrete level than I am and I have nothing to contribute :(

[Anarion]

I think you're taking it too linearly, myself. Sticking with the hold mechanic because it's familiar and is already used elsewhere in the game, this is just "take a responsibility. You can either get two points of hold, or three but people are heckling you". The sum total is the same whether you view it as gaining three points and maybe spendig one, or choosing between two or three points.

That nonlinear equivalency is what makes this work for me.

Hold is an abstract concept, but it's used in places where it matches with intuitive action. Leadership hold on the Hardholder is "I'm being a hardass to force my men to do stuff." You spend it and you roleplay shouting out commands or some scene showing your grit and endurance. When the Battlebabe gets hold to freeze up NPCs, it's specifically an ice cold staredown.

The abstract, even if you can make it work as a mechanic, doesn't really work for me if you can't explain what it is you're doing to spend the hold.

At any rate, we've probably gone back and forth on this enough at this point for Thanqol to at least get a good sense of the issue.

[SiuiS]

m
The abstract, even if you can make it work as a mechanic, doesn't really work for me if you can't explain what it is you're doing to spend the hold.

You're spendig time and energy assuring neighsayers you could have used to do actual problem solving. I thought I opened with that last night but maybe I said it poorly?

I'm doing the thing where I can grok the entirety but explain the sequence poorly.

[Tiki Snakes]

Only been skimming and barely familiar with the game anyway, but I do think that there's something odd with the savings thing. I mean, not only is the idea of having a health bar in a game about ponies doing slice-of-life episode stuff a little weird, but it specifically being cash savings?

I'm not sure where that comes from, conceptually. I'm not sure show ponies even have cash savings any more than they have an economy. Surely running out of money or other resource related reserves simply imposes a conditiony problemy thing? Something about being broke? Maybe if unsolved it resolves itself by taking your stuff, given this is a game in name at least that is about Infastructure, this seems appropriate at least to what little understanding of the system I have.

I might have missed this being resolved or abandoned already, admittedly.

[DeafnotDumb]

Exit, Stage Left: When a great magician has to leave the scene she does so with style. Roll +laughter:
10+: You're gone, and if you left under bad circumstances some of that is washed away by the impressiveness of your exit.
7-9: You're gone, but you don't leave with any particular style.

Small thing, but I feel the 10+ option should have a bonus for occasions when you're leaving the scene, but there are no bad circumstances you need to escape. Perhaps just an explicit 'You're gone with style' would suffice.

[Thanqol]

Gonna think about the Responsibility thing more today. I like Anarion's adjusted wording.

Only been skimming and barely familiar with the game anyway, but I do think that there's something odd with the savings thing. I mean, not only is the idea of having a health bar in a game about ponies doing slice-of-life episode stuff a little weird, but it specifically being cash savings?

I'm not sure where that comes from, conceptually. I'm not sure show ponies even have cash savings any more than they have an economy. Surely running out of money or other resource related reserves simply imposes a conditiony problemy thing? Something about being broke? Maybe if unsolved it resolves itself by taking your stuff, given this is a game in name at least that is about Infastructure, this seems appropriate at least to what little understanding of the system I have.

I might have missed this being resolved or abandoned already, admittedly.

It's because it's a game about little things.

Making your health bar be your savings is worthwhile I think because it makes the biggest problem in your life the looming threat of being evicted - and that's the consequence of savings 0, the bank reclaims your house. Then you're on your own, on the streets, and have until the next Season to find someone to take you in or you have to leave town. And if two people do move in together that instantly becomes a new Responsibility for both of them and starts and keeps generating Problems until the bankrupt one gets back on their feet.

It's like, what if instead of getting magical princess castle'd, the resolution to season 4 was everyone coming together to build a new house for Twilight? The inclusion of savings really creates such a strong set of incentives and communicates so much tone I couldn't do without it even though the execution still needs work.

[Ezeze]

Only been skimming and barely familiar with the game anyway, but I do think that there's something odd with the savings thing. I mean, not only is the idea of having a health bar in a game about ponies doing slice-of-life episode stuff a little weird, but it specifically being cash savings?

I'm not sure where that comes from, conceptually. I'm not sure show ponies even have cash savings any more than they have an economy. Surely running out of money or other resource related reserves simply imposes a conditiony problemy thing? Something about being broke? Maybe if unsolved it resolves itself by taking your stuff, given this is a game in name at least that is about Infastructure, this seems appropriate at least to what little understanding of the system I have.

I might have missed this being resolved or abandoned already, admittedly.

I think this is less an issue of the idea in question and more an issue of what we're calling that idea.

It's not "Savings" - it's "Infrastructure." It's not a cash reserve, it's things already in place that make life easier, which is represented as generating "Barter" every season. That Barter can then be reinvested to generate more Infrastructure, or it can be expended to generate Hold/Influence/Whatever-we-end-up-calling-that.


In Apocalypse World/Monster Hearts the worst thing that can happen to your character is that she can die horribly. We don't necessarily want that on the table in a MLP game. Instead, the worst thing that can happen is everything you've worked for is broken and gone and you have to start over.

With that in mind, it might be a better idea to at least start everyone off with the same amount of Savings/Infrastructure....