So I played Dungeon World again on Monday, and was reflecting on the different order of action.  (I also played Monster of the Week on Sunday.)  For those who aren't aware:  

1) Dungeon World does not have specific combat rounds.  Time in combat works the same way as, for example, time when the characters are engaged in different activities in the city.  

2) There are no rolls for monsters or NPCs.  If a monster attacks someone, that person must roll to fight or escape.  They get hurt based on their roll.  For example, if fighting: fail means take damage, partial success means take damage but also do damage, full success means do damage and avoid taking damage.  


On the good side:  This can move more quickly.  Basically, in traditional round-based combat there are four possibilities in an exchange:
1) PC hits, Enemy hits
2) PC hits, Enemy misses
3) PC misses, Enemy hits
4) PC misses, Enemy misses

Dungeon World eliminates #4, which can be slow.  

DW does put a burden on the GM to handle timing and take monster actions descriptively.  In my experience, it can be tricky to both (a) give players a stable and predictable order, and (b) make monsters seem like active beings rather than passive targets.  When GMing Monster of the Week, I tried to break up monster actions between player moves, and had them change threats to force players to react.  

If anyone has experiences to relate or tips to give, I'd love to hear it - and questions would also be fine.

As GM, I always try and describe the results of the PC roll, followed by some description of the larger situation. This is usually what just leaps first into my mind.

For example: "Sir Jerome swings his axe biting into the flesh of the orc. The orc cries in pain and his greenskin brothers respond by rushing to his aid."

I find this does three things:

1. It indicates which PC is likely to going next i.e. in the example above, any PC who is near the PC who just acted or who could intervene with the charge, such as a PC covering the acting PC with his bow.
2. It gives all players something to act in context with.
3. It keeps the combat feeling dynamic and not just a series of PC actions.

Its also worth noting that if the description is ignored, then its a golden opportunity and allows the GM to bring consequences. For example, if no PC tries to stop the orc charge, then the previously acting could be damaged, escalating the situation by compelling PC action.

Doesn't this belong in Other Games?

Quote from: jeff37923;676246Doesn't this belong in Other Games?

Holy Writ says it's an RPG. I still say we need to declare an Antipope.

Regarding classifying this thread, here is Pundit's post on the subject where he says to put Dungeon World in the RPG forum:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=675061&postcount=478

Back to the topic at hand:

Quote from: Skywalker;676229As GM, I always try and describe the results of the PC roll, followed by some description of the larger situation. This is usually what just leaps first into my mind.

For example: "Sir Jerome swings his axe biting into the flesh of the orc. The orc cries in pain and his greenskin brothers respond by rushing to his aid."

Agreed.  For me the tricky thing in practice is dividing up actions by other enemies between actions by different PCs.  

i.e. Sir Jerome, Tiberius, and Rat are fighting the orcs.  Other orcs do a little stuff after each of their actions.

Quote from: jhkim;676258Regarding classifying this thread, here is Pundit's post on the subject where he says to put Dungeon World in the RPG forum:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=675061&postcount=478

So the entire reason for this thread is actually what? And endzone dance?

Quote from: jeff37923;676260So the entire reason for this thread is actually what? And endzone dance?

It seems to me it is an attempt to talk about the initiative (or lack thereof) system in Dungeon World. I know, I know, it took me a lot of reading comprehension to figure it out, too, its not immediately obvious or anything. If only threads had titles or something!

Quote from: Emperor Norton;676261It seems to me it is an attempt to talk about the initiative (or lack thereof) system in Dungeon World. I know, I know, it took me a lot of reading comprehension to figure it out, too, its not immediately obvious or anything. If only threads had titles or something!

You are so cute when you are being naive.

Quote from: jeff37923;676260So the entire reason for this thread is actually what? And endzone dance?

Well, Pundit decided it can be discussed in the main forum. Now it is being discussed in the main forum.

Quote from: jhkim;676258Agreed.  For me the tricky thing in practice is dividing up actions by other enemies between actions by different PCs.  

i.e. Sir Jerome, Tiberius, and Rat are fighting the orcs.  Other orcs do a little stuff after each of their actions.

There is no reason why the GM add at the end of each dice interpretation can't bring in those other orcs. In fact, I did exactly that with the example I gave.

Another example: "You see the orc fall down dead with your arrow embedded in his skull. As his cries go silent, you can't help but hear the orc shaman continuing to chant to Gruumsh from the other side of the cave."

The later half is not quite a GM Move IMO as it doesn't really do anything or set anything up. Just draws in the combat as a whole.

Quote from: Skywalker;676268There is no reason why the GM add at the end of each dice interpretation can't bring in those other orcs. In fact, I did exactly that with the example I gave.

Another example: "You see the orc fall down dead with your arrow embedded in his skull. As his cries go silent, you can't help but hear the orc shaman continuing to chant to Gruumsh from the other side of the cave."

The later half is not quite a GM Move IMO as it doesn't really do anything or set anything up. Just draws in the combat as a whole.

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant.  This is more explicit, though, in cases where the other orc is directly involved in the fighting, rather than chanting on the other side of the room.  

To take a deliberately simple situation...  

The GM says to the fighter "Two orcs rush out of either side passage to attack you."  The player says "I step back, hefting my shield and swing at the one on the right."  The GM calls for Hack and Slash, and the player succeeds - choosing to deal his normal damage to one orc and not take damage back.  

The question is, how do you handle what the other orc does?  It seems like different GMs could handle this differently.  The GM could say that the successful roll means that he defends against both orcs.  Alternately, the GM could say that the successful roll means defeating the targeted orc, but the other orc gets in a hit so the PC takes damage.  I guess I would tend toward the latter, but I'm not sure.

Quote from: jhkim;676277The question is, how do you handle what the other orc does?  It seems like different GMs could handle this differently.  The GM could say that the successful roll means that he defends against both orcs.  Alternately, the GM could say that the successful roll means defeating the targeted orc, but the other orc gets in a hit so the PC takes damage.  I guess I would tend toward the latter, but I'm not sure.

It depends. If you want to play hard ball, attacking one orc when two are threatening is a golden opportunity. The PC fells Orc 1 and then takes damage from Orc 2.

If you feel that's too hard, then follow the attack with a description of Orc 2 bearing down on the PC and ask a nearby PC what do they do. If they do nothing, the first PC takes damage.

Alternatively, and probably best of all, before the attack is made tell the PC who wants to make the attack that in order to do so they need to fend off the Orc 2 somehow. That's Defy Danger Str or Dex. If the PC succeeds, they get to make the Hack and Slash roll immediately without any danger from Orc 2. If they get 7-9, the choice the GM gives them will be "You can make a Hack n Slash against the Orc 1 but Orc 2 will hit you. What do you do?" If the PC proceeds, they take damage from Orc 2.

I also use this last approach for combat advantage type situations i.e. where one person is unarmed and attacking an armed person - "You want to attack a guy wielding a sword with your bare hands? Well, you are going to have to get within reach before you can even do so, so that's Defy Danger Dex."

The thing with DW is though the DM doesn't roll and get to take "actions", they can still be very active through compelling action by the PCs. The GM can describe things that require action from a PC or a consequence happens. This also makes it fun for the players who are reacting to these threats.

Quote from: jeff37923;676263You are so cute when you are being naive.

I'd rather be considered naive than paranoid.

Unless you think that standing pitchfork at the ready is somehow preferable to giving people the benefit of the doubt and that maybe they just you know, want to talk about the games they play.

But no, I'm sure this thread is all about you, and how much you dislike Dungeon World. Must be nice living in a world where everything is about you.

Quote from: Skywalker;676280It depends. If you want to play hard ball, attacking one orc when two are threatening is a golden opportunity. The PC fells Orc 1 and then takes damage from Orc 2.

If you feel that's too hard, then follow the attack with a description of Orc 2 bearing down on the PC and ask a nearby PC what do they do. If they do nothing, the first PC takes damage.

Alternatively, and probably best of all, before the attack is made tell the PC who wants to make the attack that in order to do so they need to fend off the Orc 2 somehow. That's Defy Danger Str or Dex. If the PC succeeds, they get to make the Hack and Slash roll immediately without any danger from Orc 2. If they get 7-9, the choice the GM gives them will be "You can make a Hack n Slash against the Orc 1 but Orc 2 will hit you. What do you do?" If the PC proceeds, they take damage from Orc 2.

I also use this last approach for combat advantage type situations i.e. where one person is unarmed and attacking an armed person - "You want to attack a guy wielding a sword with your bare hands? Well, you are going to have to get within reach before you can even do so, so that's Defy Danger Dex."

The thing with DW is though the DM doesn't roll and get to take "actions", they can still be very active through compelling action by the PCs. The GM can describe things that require action from a PC or a consequence happens. This also makes it fun for the players who are reacting to these threats.

Haven't played the game at all but would seem like making it an explicit choice for the Player to either defend from both attack both or block on and attack the other woudl be the most obvious way.

So
GM: Two orcs rush towards you screaming battle cries.
PC: I will swing my blade.
GM: So do you want to Attack them both all out, Focus on one and ignore the other or split the differnce and go in more defensively.
PC: I will atack the one on my right and use my shield to block any incoming attacks.
GM: Okay on a partial the one you are defending against will get a hit. On a failure you will miss and get hit.
PC : Rolls ......

If the PC selects less obvious tactics...
PC : I will swing my blade in an curving arc hiting the one to my left by then continuing hte swing to catcht eh other as I spin on my leading foot and drop to a low stance.
GM: Okay I am going to give you an additional -2. On a partial you only hit the first one and hte second one will land a meaty blow. If you fail I will require a Dex check or you will end up prone.

etc etc


Is that how it works ? seems to from the descriptions of play

In general terms, yes (the details are off). Before asking "What do you do?", the GM can first present as open or as compelling a situation as they want.