Welcome Aironfabio

I said high-budget, not necessarily good ;)

since you seem to somewhat dislike Magpie and are critical of DW, may I ask you what are your favorite PbtAa ?

True.
Not at all. I really like Mark Diaz Truman and Andrew Medeiros, and also enjoyed Brendan Conway's roleplay (if not his work so much (it is excellent stuff, but not my style)). 'Meh' was merely that there are so many others... and the budget does not impress me.
I suppose that could be accurate. It is among the least favorite of the games I play. But it is still on the list. I do wish another fantasy PbtA would unseat it, something that does not pander to DnD as much. AW:Fallen Empires is a great contender with the right group.
I don't really know if 'favorite' is the right term. There are many, and some are better suited to some games, groups, or playstyles than others. Swapping to one the does what you want, makes more sense than forcing the one you have to do something it is not good at.

There are so many, that I can not hope to list them off the top of my head.

That said. I do often find that, after a while, that a game that aims to do a thing might have enough rough edges that I revert back to implementing the idea in base Apocalypse World. That really is a well written game with clear instructions --if you can get past the tone and language-- and working Moves

Sometimes a game provides enough to the base experience that it is worth keeping it. Impulse Drive comes to mind in this regard, it is a bit messy, and has too many moves, but is still my go to for most space stuff (even though I struggle to justify it each time). The free version has all the text of the paid version, (except for the sample adventure), and is just missing the artwork (using free stuff from the time), but I find myself using it at the table rather than the paid version because it is easier to read without the fancy layout.

Monster of the Week is probably my go-to Modern (and historical) Urban Fantasy, even though it has some rough edges (it is from very early-years PbtA) and some slightly wonky mechanics (don't mistake it for an 'Investigation Game':).

I am keen to try Nahual (by Andrew Medeiros mentioned above), and am waiting for it to be available. It is a very specific type of Urban Fantasy, but has a clever way of integrating the Stress mechanic from Blades in the Dark into PbtA. The themes are a little dark for my tastes, which is why I did not back the KS, but, from what I have seen, I am, now, sorry I didn't.

Yesterday's Tomorrow is my go to Cyberpunk game. It is probably the only one where there is no other contender in the ring for that genre (maybe Headspace?).

What else is there?

I have half of an idea fo running a proper Vignette using the avatar quisckstart rather then setting up a mock thread. I'll see tomorrow.

Cool. You can get to play with teaching the game as well.

Will grab the quickstart later today.

I gave them my email, they said 'thank you for signing up' and removed the 'get your copy' button, I have not received anything from them (magpie are usually pretty good, I know I get constant communications from them about projects I have backed).

There also looks like there will be enough interest. Since I don't know the setting I won't join the game.

This Round Table is still a place to ask questions and talk about options. So don't hesitate to ask. Provide enough (non-spoiler) context so we can know how to help.

Good luck.

How's the game going, Aironfabio? Did it turn out the way you expected? Any cool/fun stories to tell so far?

just started now. The game is public if you want to read.
This post gave me a bit of pause, since the player used the character sheet as if it was DnD, without thinking about moves.

In general, I'm starting to think that PbtA are less suited than other systems to PbPs. We'll see how this vignette goes.

Oh, yeah. I see what you mean. Might take a few posts for it to become clear.

Looks like you dropped them into some action right away. No messing around huh? :D Never heard of a condorpard before, lol. It looks as weird as it sounds. I love it!
Oh yeah? How come?
I was reading this post recently, and it looks like D&D gets annoyingly difficult because of all the reactions and saving throws.

The players do need to understand how things work. Especially if they have DnD experience. It is possible the quickstart does not have enough rules to teach them how PbtA works?

That example looks like a standard failure to use 'Fiction First, and only then look for Moves'. The attempt to roll a Stat rather then Move is less of a problem than looking at the sheet and trying to use a mechanical thing rather than a fictional thing.

---

Where I tend to disagree with the general consensus is the claim that PbP is a good way to learn new systems. It can be a good way to try out new systems, but learning often benefits from instruction, and instruction is --even more-- tricky when you are not talking to people face to face to see what they understand; and when there are a multi-hour (or even multi-day) delays between asking and getting instruction on each new rule, leading to people not bothering to ask question.

This fear of delay often results in people wanting to 'guess and make rolls' (or use the mechanics) preemptively so as to avoid keeping people waiting. It is hard to explain to people that their uninformed mistaken use of rules is actually slowing things down in the long run. But that is standard 'birth pains' of any new endeavour, taking it slow at first means it can run smoother later.

I have found it much easier to teach people who have never played any RPGs before. Not only are they more willing to accept instruction (they don't already think they know it all), but we don't have to teach 'new ways' of doing things or overcome the "change is uncomfortable" syndrome.

Teaching a new system and mindset (PbtA), at the same time as a new game (Avatar) is doubly tricky. That is the big draw for Dungeon World, and a large motivation for making it: They kept much of the terminology the same, and readded several things from DnD (the six aspects, the 3-18, the rolling of funny-shaped dice for damage, the classes, ...) purposely to ease the transition; and Tolkienesque Fantasy is also familiar enough that there is no real need to think the setting while learning the new system.

Mostly because of "never speak the name of move" mindset. And emphasis on conversation.

The few times I played PbtA at the table, it is

Player1: "my pc does this"
GM (sometimes entire table): "sounds to me like Move"
Player1: "yeah, it's more or less my intention, I'll roll"

The player never assumes a move. There's always a need for consensus at the table about intent. I find it hard to transition this mindset in asynchronous. We'll see as the vignette progresses.

DnD high level is definitely worse in PbP, I played 10th level Pathfinder and it was hell.

The other game I'm running, Spire, so far seems the best fit.

That does only apply to GM Moves, not to player Moves.

And, honestly, I always took that to mean you need to paint the picture in the fiction and not just use the moves names (as DnDers would do). There is no harm also mentioning the move name as an aside, so long as the group is not all so focused on 'immersion' that a little meta-conversation will hurt.

From the Apocalypse World book:

Ah, right. I know what you mean. It does slow things down sometimes. As a player I usually make it easier by adding "try" to my action.

So instead of.
Player: "I grab my sword and stab the creature"
I'd say
Player: "I grab my sword and try to stab the creature, hoping to make it fall backwards so I can then cut its head off".

This has some benefits in my opinion.
- The GM can see what you are trying to do and adjust a possible bad roll to still make that idea work.
- You can do multiple rolls in 1 post.
- The other players already know what to expect for their next move. (unless it's a bad roll)
- The GM can say "that doesn't need a roll, it just works"

It still requires some back and forth, but seems like a much nicer flow of things.

That is a very useful technique. GMs appreciate not needing to fight the fiction of what a player says they have already done.

In a similar vein: I don't like to tell the player what they characters do, so I tend to favour language like "If you were to enter the room you would find that ..." so the players can see that entering the room would not need a roll, and that they would not be attacked or trapped or anything and can just proceed, and they don't have to object with "But I was not planning on going in there till I checked the library first."

I've noticed this in our game together, vagueGM. It definitely felt weird to me at first. It felt 'dirty' to enter a place already knowing what there was to find. Or deciding that the thing in that room isn't worth finding and going the other way. It invites meta-info decision making. But after this kind of thing happening a few times, it makes a lot of sense and it works well. Had to twist my brain a bit to accept it. :)

It might, yes. If I find that happening I stop using that trick. If players can't cope with the streamlining then they get an unstreamlined game.
Did it feel weird enough that you think it should be avoided, in the future, in general? (Gathering data-points, so please answer honestly)

No, not for me anyway. I enjoy learning new methods of play. I see the benefit of using it in PbP.

It's just the fact that everyone learns RP in a certain way and you get accustomed to those ideas. It takes some getting used to when someone proposes a different way.

It is particularly useful in asynchronous play, but I used the same technique even before the internet.
Yeah, that can be jarring, and make new games harder to learn. The more 'ways' we know the less strange any new ones seem, if we only know one way, then it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that is 'the way'.