Fiction First in PbtA Games

This is one of those topics that I like to talk about a lot in various places, and I've mentioned it in several posts on this site, but it comes up often enough that I think it deserves its own post.

In some online discussions about Powered by the Apocalypse (PbtA) games I see a couple of variations of the following:

PbtA seems very restrictive, the moves list is short and I feel like I have to be constrained to the list of options.

I've heard this from both GMs and Players, as well, since most PbtA's also include “GM Moves”, which are designed to be used when the players either roll poorly or the situation begs for it.

What I'm here to tell you today is that the Moves are simply reminders of the stuff you can do and an interface to the game mechanics. You're not meant to think about them until the very moment in the fiction where they become relevant.

“Traditional” vs PbtA Style

So, if you're like me, you probably started playing TTRPGs with Dungeons and Dragons. It is the largest grossing TTRPG in the US, so the odds are very solid that you did. The second-highest, Paizo's Pathfinder, also draws from a D&D lineage further crowding the field.

D&D starting from around 3.0 and many other games from that era have a particular characteristic about them: They're crunchy, and they tend to incentivize the players and GM to look to the character's abilities in order to solve problems. I talk about that a bunch in Designing Outside the Character Sheet. But today let's focus on some of the knock-on effects that PbtA games particularly try to solve.

In D&D, what tends to happen is something like this fictionalized account:

GM: Okay, you see two guards patrolling. It's dark, but they've got torches.
Player: I'll roll stealth to get around them!

Since I wasn't around the Forge at the time these games were designed (though for an account of the history, Designers & Dragons 90s and 00s are a great reference), I can't speak to the original design motivations, but there are a significant amount of PbtA variants that reinforce the idea that the fiction comes first before all other things. PbtA games would prefer you forget the mechanics at all, until they're relevant.

How PbtA is designed to run

Quotes from PbtA Games

I'm going to quote a few different games, but let's start with the parent of all other PbtAs: Apocalypse World.

You probably know this already: roleplaying is a conversation. You and the
other players go back and forth, talking about these fictional characters
in their fictional circumstances doing whatever it is that they do. Like
any conversation, you take turns, but it’s not like taking turns, right?
Sometimes you talk over each other, interrupt, build on each others’ ideas,
monopolize and hold forth. All fine.

These rules mediate the conversation. They kick in when someone says
some particular things, and they impose constraints on what everyone
should say after. Makes sense, right? - Apocalypse World 2nd edition, page 9

This section immediately following:

The rule for moves is to do it, do it. In order for it to be a move and for the
player to roll dice, the character has to do something that counts as that
move; and whenever the character does something that counts as a move,
it’s the move and the player rolls dice. - Apocalypse World 2nd edition, page 10

Now, I think there are more clear ways to say this, so let me quote Urban Shadows:

Moves don’t just go off whenever you think it might be interesting; they have to be triggered by something you say in the conversation, usually an action your character takes. If you want to trigger a move, you have to do the thing that triggers it. - Urban Shadows, page 19.

And to shamelessly promote myself, from my upcoming PbtA game:

In many games, there is a separation between the narrative fiction and the “rules” which enable characters to act. In Nix Noctis, the fiction always triggers the moves. The moves themselves are simply ways to resolve interesting things in the fiction via their mechanics.

Characters in Nix Noctis may attempt anything they want and that may or may not trigger a move depending on what they’ve done. - Nix Noctis

The Fiction is the Fiction, the Moves connect the Fiction to the Character's abilities

So, from all of those quotes, I can distill the essence of what a PbtA wants you to do. If we take the example above from D&D and rework it for PbtA it would go something like this:

GM: Okay, you see two guards patrolling. It's dark, but they've got torches.
Player: Hmm, I'll wait until they're far enough apart that their torchlight doesn't overlap and I'll dash between them.
GM: Great, that sounds like you're Speed Skulking, roll +Gogogo.

The "Speed Skulking" Move in our example will have some rules attached to it, usually in the form of "pick some options if you get a certain roll" and the move itself can be modified by character abilities. There are a lot of ways to mix-and-match them.

For players, moves triggering are how you adjudicate whether a character is good at a thing, rather than relying entire on player ingenuity (which is something OSR games tend to do). The rules hammer home multiple times that you cannot trigger a move by naming it, you must describe what you're doing, and the GM will adjudicate the appropriate move, if any.

What if there's not a move that fits? You have several options, but I default to "you just do it". You could make up some custom moves if it's a thing you expect to come up a lot, but really it's okay to just let the fiction flow.

What about GM Moves?

I'll say something that may sound a little controversial, but I don't think it is: The GM moves are there to teach you how to GM this kind of game, and are things that GMs just "do". You are never supposed to name them, you simply trigger them when appropriate.

• Separate them.
• Capture someone.
• Put someone in a spot.

These are just examples of the things that you can do in response to a failed roll, but you're not meant to "pick them from a menu". Instead, you should do what logically comes from a situation. For some concrete examples, my post on Cascading Consequence in PbtA Games covers both the concept of logical consequences and Hard vs. Soft moves.

Always choose a move that can follow logically from what’s going on in the
game’s fiction. It doesn’t have to be the only one, or the most likely, but it
does have to make at least some kind of sense. - Apocalypse World, 2nd Edition, page 89

None of these things are meant to constrain you. They're there to inspire you. You're also allowed to go off the board.

Basically, every one of those moves is there to give you an idea of what you could do and to teach you how to play to find out. In short, to teach GMs not familiar with the style how to run the game.

An Aside: 24xx

Another game near to my heart (I've written 4 games using the SRD) is 24xx. Jason Tocci has done a great job of keeping the game succinct while also taking cues from PbtA for how his games are structured. There are no lists of what you do, it simply says:

Players describe what their characters do. The GM judges when their action is impossible, demands a cost or extra steps, or presents a risk. Players can revise plans before committing so as to change goal/stakes. Only roll to avoid risk. - 2400: Data Loss

Here's the thing about that, though. The rules can be that succinct because they assume you're already familiar with this kind of gameplay and collaborative storytelling. Had this system been created when Apocalypse World was, I don't think as many folks would get it.

PbtA games carry forward the idea that the rules need to explain the play style, which is why you find the same or similar introductory paragraphs in them.

Similarities between PbtA games

Once you've collected a lot of PbtA games (or in my case started writing one) you'll realize that there are some core commonalities between them:

• They all have explanatory sections to tell you how to run the game as if you're coming from a Traditional gaming background
  • I believe (and I'm also doing this) because as a product, new players are likely to come from a place with zero grounding in the PbtA play style
• They tend to have the "same" basic moves with different names and sometimes some different options — all themed to the "vibe" of the game.
• They'll have theme-specific moves, also around the game's "vibe"
• Very similar GM moves and Principles.

Once you've internalized this, the moves tend to fade into the background and your group can focus on the conversation and tell a story together.

Could you please summarize that for me?

Sure!

1. Always start with the fiction and telling a story together. Do not name the moves, just say what you do.
2. The GM will say what move you triggered and when. If you didn't trigger a move, just keep narrating.
3. The Moves connect the fiction to the rules, they're not a menu or a restriction.

Keep those things in mind and I think you'll have a more enjoyable time playing and running PbtA style games!