Hardwired/Apocalypse–Listen Up, You Proactive Screwheads!!!

TL;DR: GM-ing a cyberpunk game has always meant going for the PCs’ throats. Mining Apocalypse World for advice lets you do it the collaborative way (<5 min. read).

Proactive characters are a cyberpunk trope. If you need convincing, check the cast of William Gibson’s Neuromancer or the plot summary for Walter Jon Williams’ Hardwired.  Fate captures that trope with the third paragraph of the intro section of Fate Core.

“Fate doesn’t come with a default setting, but it works best with any premise where the characters are proactive, capable people leading dramatic lives.”

Fate Core, p.2

Another cyberpunk trope is being in it way over one’s head. So, it’s not a cyberpunk game if you don’t go for the PCs’ throats to reflect that. It’s cyber-glam punk. Nobody wants glam punk.

Good Old Days, Not

Back in the CP2020 days, GMs’ priorities were slightly skewed by the game system: the GM’s job was, mostly, preventing NPCs from dying too fast, and waiting for cyberpsychosis to hit the PCs, then push the “reset” button when it (invariably) did.

In 1994, R. Talsorian Game published Listen Up, You Primitive Screwheads!!!!—a bible in nastiness that made GM-ing CP2020 great again. No more gangs of cybered-up-to-the-gills NPCs, no more fudging rules for BBEGs. Instead, deception, misdirection, fighting dirty, and explosives. (CD Projekt Red must have skipped that entry on the reading list.)

Fig.1 Listen Up, You Primitive Screwheads!!!!

Listen Up… could still work with Cyberpunk RED. But if you don’t dig the 1980s-90s game design and its obsession for critical failure (“fumbles”), you’re better off looking elsewhere. I get fumbles as game-balance devices (NPCs can fumble too) and random plot generators. Only, they make the GM kinda one-dimensional: manager of opposition (hostile NPCs) and bringer of bad news (PCs fumbles), mitigated by occasional relief (NPCs fumbles). 

With the ratio of PCs-to-NPCs rolls typical of 1980s-90s RPG design (which Cyberpunk RED sadly still represents), bad news has a much higher frequency than good news. Granted, N/PCs critical-succeed, too, but that’s more bad news (when NPCs do), and the GM gets no credit for reading critical success tables for PCs.

Fuck around with, not over

RPG game design has improved in the 2000s-10s. Systems like Fate introduced “success at a cost,” which works just as well as fumbles for N/PCs balancing and is better from a collaborative storytelling standpoint—at least if cost is negotiable. Apocalypse World (AW) goes even further and dispenses with NPC rolls altogether. 

Fate’s symmetric rules let the GM lead by example with NPCs (e.g., Create Advantages). More generally, Fate does a better job than AW at setting a stage for “proactive, capable” PCs: it lets players influence and leverage the fiction mechanically (with Aspects and Invokes), which AW does not. Cortex Prime is the only system that does it just as well (and possibly better) but that’s a topic for another day.

Still, AW does many things better than Fate—including teaching newbies how to play the game (and about that other day: Cortex Prime does better at that, too). AW’s sections on the Master/Mistress of Ceremony (MC, the AW jargon for GM) contain top-shelf advice for GM-ing collaborative storytelling games where the PCs’ life is not unicorns and rainbows. 

All I need, at that point, is to flash a screengrab of AW’s list of MC/GM moves, give you a mental gymnastic translation scheme, and be done with it. Here’s one: read Fig. 2 replacing…

  •  … “apocalypse” and “apocalyptica” with cyberpunk and Cybernetica
  • … “threats” with NPCs (you’d have to bronze-rule a few); 
  • … any mention of making a “move” with taking an Action with a strong bias for Creating an Advantage or Declaring a Story detail—or, on the GM side, placing an Aspect or Compelling one of the PCs’.

Bam! Job done.

• Make Apocalypse World seem real.
• Make the players’ characters’ lives not boring.
• Play to 􀃫nd out what happens.
• What the principles demand.
• What the rules demand.
• What your prep demands.
• What honesty demands.
• Barf forth apocalyptica.
• Address yourself to the characters, not the
• Make your move, but misdirect.
• Make your move, but never speak its name.
• Look through crosshairs.
• Name everyone, make everyone human.
• Ask provocative questions and build on the
• Respond with fuckery and intermittent
• Be a fan of the players’ characters.
• ink offscreen too.
• Sometimes, disclaim decision-making.
• Separate them.
• Capture someone.
• Put someone in a spot.
• Trade harm for harm (as established).
• Announce off-screen badness.
• Announce future badness.
• In􀃬ict harm (as established).
• Take away their stuff.
• Make them buy.
• Activate their stuff’s downside.
• Tell them the possible consequences and ask.
• Offer an opportunity, with or without a cost.
• Turn their move back on them.
• Make a threat move (from one of your threats).
• After every move: “what do you do?”
• Make maps.
• Turn questions back on the asker or over
to the group at large.
• Digress occasionally.
• Elide the action sometimes, and zoom in
on its details other times.
• Go around the table.
• Take breaks and take your time.
• MC the game. Bring it.
• Describe. Barf forth apocalyptica.
• Springboard off character creation.
• Ask every question you think of.
• Leave yourself things to wonder about.
• Look for where they’re not in control.
• Push there.
• Nudge the players to have their
characters make moves.
• Give every character good screen time
with other characters.
• Leap forward with named, human NPCs.
• Hell, have a 􀃫ght.
• Start creating your threat map.
In order to play to 􀃫nd out what happens,
you’ll need to pass decision-making off
sometimes. Whenever something comes
up that you’d prefer not to decide by
personal whim and will, don’t. e game
gives you four key tools you can use to
disclaim responsibility. You can:
• Put it in your NPCs’ hands.
• Put it in the players’ hands.
• Create a countdown.
• Make it a stakes question.
Fig. 2. Apocalypse World 2E (c) 2016 D. Vincent Baker & Meguey Baker (fair use)

Well, almost. You’d have to figure details by yourself. Still, if you want more inspiration, grab a copy of AW 2E (not a sponsored link). 

Wrapping up: Listen Up, You Proactive, Capable Screwheads!

A GM in a collaborative storytelling game does not necessarily play nice. This applies to cyberpunk games because it’s part of the cyberpunk tropes. But it applies to other settings as well. Actually, “with any premise where the characters are proactive, capable people leading dramatic lives.”

Simply put, proactive, capable characters don’t do milk runs. Thus, they don’t run into milkmen.

And that’s all for today, folks.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s