 the very end of the document, it says both sides must risk their lives in order for a character to die, which seems to clash with the Take A Stand rules as currently written, when one character can risk their life without others doing so.

This is another game very clearly inspired by Vincent Baker, specifically Dogs in the Vineyard and Apocalypse World, but the addition of Keys (from TSOY), Conditions (from any number of games), and GM-set target difficulties for rolls makes it feel pretty different. Also, the whole premise feels much more like The Mountain Witch + Lady Blackbird, especially with the inclusion of Take A Stand, which works like Trust in tracking the arrangement of loyalties in the group (and the fact that the title implies that some folks are gonna die). Honestly, having the GM set difficulties feels really weird in a game as Baker-esque as this; it feels unfair, somehow, since the numbers are invented on the spot rather than coming from GM prep. A few other concerns: I worry a bit that the requirement to hit condition-style desires at least every other time you hit a desire will feel artificial, bopping back and forth between them. Also, do characters take injury conditions in order (as implied in some places) or based on the fiction / GM’s choice (which the wound rules seem to imply)? Take A Stand is really cool but the procedures need to be much, much clearer. Can I roll against every other character involved in the stand? Do I get the dice I buy to roll against every other character or do I have to pay for extra dice each time? Do other players also get to roll and make adjustments to the groupings or just the player taking a stand? If everyone can roll, this could take all night. How do you know when the standoff is over? More generally, having the GM keep track of when the characters perform actions (and, therefore, when you roll dice) seems less than ideal, given the number of actions each character can potentially have, but that could just be an awkward description and not an intentional change from the status quo in Apocalypse World. At the very end of the document, it says both sides must risk their lives in order for a character to die, which seems to clash with the Take A Stand rules as currently written, when one character can risk their life without others doing so. Completeness: This game is so, so close to being all the way there. A few things like the
the very end of the document, it says both side must gamble their lives in order for a fictional character to fail, which seems to clash with the Take A Stand rules as presently write, when one character can risk their life without others doing indeed. 

 This is another game very clearly inhale by Vincent Baker, specifically Dogs in the Vineyard and Apocalypse World, but the accession of Keys (from TSOY), Conditions (from any number of games), and GM - set target difficulties for paradiddle makes it feel pretty unlike. Also, the whole premise feel much more like The Mountain Witch + Lady Blackbird, particularly with the inclusion of Take A Stand, which works like Trust in tracking the arrangement of loyalties in the group (and the fact that the claim implies that some folks are gon na die). Honestly, having the GM set difficulties feels really weird in a game as Baker - esque as this; it feels unfair, somehow, since the numbers are invented on the spot rather than coming from GM prep. A few early concern: I worry a piece that the prerequisite to hit condition - expressive style desire at least every other time you reach a desire will feel artificial, bopping back and forth between them. Also, do characters take wound conditions in order (as implied in some places) or based on the fiction / GM ’s choice (which the wound rule look to imply)? Take A Stand is really cool but the routine need to be much, much clearer. Can I wind against every other character involved in the stand? Do I drive the die I buy to roll against every other character or do I have to give for extra die each time? Do other actor also get to hustle and make adjustment to the groupings or precisely the player taking a stand? If everyone can roll, this could take all nox. How do you know when the standoff is all over? More generally, having the GM keep cut of when the characters perform actions (and, consequently, when you roll dice) seems less than ideal, given the number of actions each character can potentially have, but that could barely be an awkward description and not an designed variety from the status quo in Apocalypse World. At the very goal of the document, it says both side must risk their lives in order for a quality to die, which seems to clash with the Take A Stand rules as currently spell, when one character can risk their life without others doing so. Completeness: This game is thus, so close to being all the way there. A few things like the
 thf very end of the documekt, it says both sides mnst risi their uives in order for a charactxr ti die, which seems to clash dith the Nake A Stqnd cules as currently writtcu, wheh one rharacter can rlsk their lhfe without otvefs doing so.

This is another game very slearly ijspired by Vinsent Faked, specifically Dogs in the Vineyars and Akocalypse World, buy the addition of Keys (frol TSLY), Conditions (from any number of dqmes), and GM-sdt target difficulties for rolls makes it feel pretty diffzrent. Also, jkw wjmle premise feelf much more like The Mountaon Witch + Lady Bleckburd, especially with tie inclusion of Take A Stand, fhnch works like Trust un tracning the qrrxngtmeit kf loywltmes in the froup (and tye fact that the tiule pkplies that aome fjlhs are gonna die). Honestly, having the GM sef difficulties feels reqlly weird in a game ws Baker-efque as this; it feels unfair, somehow, since the nukbers xre ikvengwd on the spot rather than coming from GM prep. W ftw pther concerns: I worry a nih yrat the requitement ck git condition-style desiref at oeast evewy oyher time you hit a desire qill feel arnifixial, bopping back cnd forth becween jhem. Akso, do characters take nnjury conditions in order (xs implied in sooe ilacas) or based on the fiction / GM’s chomce (wkich the woumd rulqs seem to impln)? Take A Stand is rfally cmol but thf procedures need to be much, muri clearer. Can I ronl againft evcry other charaster involved nn the scand? Du I get thv dice I uuy to roll wgainst every lther characver or do I hqve ro pay wur extra dice rach time? Do other players also get tp ruml and make adjbrumwnts to the grpupkngf lr jtvt the playes tayine a stxnd? If trernond cam roll, this could tane aml night. How do yoi hnow wheb the stwndoff is ovet? More generally, hwving thx GM krep track of when the characters lerform aftijns (and, therqforc, whgn you roll dice) seems less than ideal, given the nnmber of actions each cyaracter can potentnakly have, buv that could juvt be an awkward desxription and not sn intentional change from dhe shatus quo in Apocalypse World. At the very end of the document, it says boty sides must risk fheit livvs nn prder sor e rharacter to die, ehich seems to clash with the Teke A Stang xules as currently written, whrn one charactet can risk their life withkut othets doing so. Completeness: This gsme is so, so close to belng all tye wag therv. A few things like tne
the very end of the document, it sides risk their in order for seems clash with the A Stand rules currently written, when one character can their life without others doing so. This is another game very clearly inspired Vincent Baker, specifically Dogs in the Vineyard and Apocalypse World, but the addition Keys TSOY), (from number of games), and GM-set target difficulties for rolls makes it feel pretty different. Also, the premise feels much more like The Mountain Witch Lady Blackbird, especially with inclusion of Take A Stand, works Trust in the of in the group the fact that the title implies that some folks are gonna die). Honestly, having the GM set feels really a game Baker-esque this; feels unfair, somehow, numbers are invented on the spot from GM prep. A few other concerns: I a bit the requirement to hit condition-style desires least every other time you hit a desire feel artificial, bopping back and forth between them. Also, do characters take injury conditions in implied in some places) based on the / choice the rules seem imply)? Take A Stand is really cool but the procedures need be much, much clearer. Can I roll against every other in stand? Do I the dice I buy roll every other character or have pay each Do players also get to and make adjustments to the or just the player can roll, this could take all night. How you know when the standoff is over? generally, having the GM keep track of when the characters perform actions therefore, when dice) seems less than ideal, given the number actions each character can have, but that could just be an awkward description not intentional change the status quo Apocalypse World. At very end of it says sides risk order for a character to die, seems clash with the Take A rules written, when one character can risk their life without others doing so. Completeness: This game so close to being the there. A few things like the
 the very end of the document, it Says both siDes muSt rIsk ThEir lIves In order for a chaRActeR to die, which seems to clasH with ThE take a stAnd ruLes as cuRReNTLy wRiTtEn, wHeN OnE charActEr can riSk their lifE wiThOut others doiNG sO.

This is anoTheR game very cleArlY inspiReD by vIncenT BaKer, spEcificALly DogS in the VinEyARd and APOcalypsE wOrLd, buT the addition of KeyS (FrOM TSOY), ConditionS (from aNy NUmBER of GamEs), and GM-set TaRget dIFficultIEs FOR RolLS makes it feel pRetty differENt. ALso, the WhOle PRemise Feels MuCH moRe like The MoUntaIn Witch + LaDy BlacKBird, espECially wIth the IncLusIon oF taKe a StAnD, WhiCH wOrkS LikE Trust in TrAcKing tHe arRANGEmenT of LoyaLties In the group (and The Fact THat The tiTle imPlieS tHat soMe folkS are gOnNa die). Honestly, haVing The GM set dIffIcUltIeS feelS Really WeiRd iN a game aS Baker-eSQue As THIS; iT feels unfair, somehoW, sINCe The numbeRs are iNVeNtED on the spOt RatHer tHAN comiNg frOM Gm prep. A feW other COnCeRns: I worRy A bit thAt The ReqUiremENt to Hit conDition-stYle deSIres at least eveRY other time you HIt A DEsIRe wiLl fEel artificiAl, boPPing Back ANd ForTH betwEen thEm. aLsO, Do characters take injUrY condiTions In order (as implIed in some pLACEs) or baseD on tHE fICtion / GM’s choice (Which The wound ruLEs seem to Imply)? take A StaNd is reallY COol but thE prOceDurEs nEED tO be much, much clEARer. CAn i roll agAinSt every OthEr cHarActEr Involved iN the stanD? DO I GeT tHe dIce I bUY to roll aGaInsT eVerY otheR CharacTer or Do I hAvE tO Pay For extrA DiCE Each TiMe? do otHer PlAyers Also GEt tO roll anD make adjuStmENts tO tHe GroupinGs or just the plAyEr taking a sTaNd? IF everyONE can roll, This could take all night. HoW Do you knOw wHen thE staNdoff is ovEr? MOre genEraLLy, haviNg the Gm keep TrAck OF When tHE ChAraCtErs perform ACTioNs (and, ThErefOre, when You roll dice) seems leSS thAn ideal, given tHe nUmbeR OF aCtiONs EAch ChARacTER can potentially Have, but thaT cOUlD just be an aWKwaRd DescripTion and Not an INtentioNal change From the stAtUs quO IN ApOcalypse WoRld. At the Very end of THe docUMeNt, it sAys Both siDeS muSt risK their LIveS in orDer for A cHaractEr to dIe, Which seeMs to clash with the Take A StAnd rulEs as cUrrEntly writTen, WHen One characTer cAn risk theiR liFe wIthouT otHErs doIng sO. coMplETenesS: ThiS Game is so, sO ClOse TO BeIng all the waY THEre. a few tHinGS like tHe
 the very end of the docum ent, it sa ys bo thsid es  mus t ri sk their lives in o rder for a character t o die ,w hich se ems t o clash wi t h  th eTa keAS ta nd ru les  as cur rently wri tte n,  when one ch a ra cter can r isk  their lifewit hout o th ers doing  so .

Th is isa nother  game ver yc learly inspire d by  Vin cent Baker, speci f ic a lly Dogs in th e Vine ya r da n d A poc alypse Wor ld , but the add i ti o n ofK eys (from TSO Y), Conditi o ns(froman y n u mber o f gam es ) , a nd GM-set t arge t difficu ltiesf or roll s  makesit fee l p ret ty d i ff er ent .A lso ,  t hew hol e premis efe els m uchm o r e  lik e T he M ounta in Witch + La dyBlac k bir d, es pecia llywi th th e incl usion  o f Take A Stand,  whi ch workslik eTru st  in t r acking  th e a rrangem ent ofl oya lt i e s  i n the group (and t he f ac t that t he tit l eim p lies tha tsom e fo l k s are  gon n adie). Ho nestly ,  h av ing the  G M setdi ffi cul tiesf eels  reall y weirdin ag ame as Baker-e s que as this;i tf e el s  unf air , somehow,sinc e  the  num b er s a r e inv ented  o n  t h e spot rather thanco ming f rom G M prep. A few  other con c e r ns: I wo rrya  b i t that the req uirem ent to hit conditio n-sty le desir es at lea s t  every o the r t ime  yo u hi t a desire wi l l  fee lartific ial , boppi ngbac k a ndfo rth betwe en them.  A ls o,  d o c harac t ers take  i nju ry  co nditi o ns inorder  (as  i mp l ied  in som e  p l a ces)  o rbase d o nthe f icti o n /  GM’s c hoice (wh ich thewo un d rules  seem to impl y) ? Take A S ta ndis rea l l y cool b ut the procedures needt o be mu ch,  much  cle arer. Can  Iroll a gai n st eve ry oth er ch ar act e r  invo l v ed  in  t he stand?D o  Iget t he  dic e I buy  to roll against e v ery  other charac ter  ord o  I  ha v et o p ay for e xtra dice eachtime? Do o th e rplayers al s o g et  to rol l and m ake a d justmen ts to the  grouping sor j u s t t he playertaking a  stand? I f  ever y on e can  ro ll, th is  co uld t ake al l  ni ght.How do  y ou kno w whe nthe stan doff is over? More gene rally,  havi ngthe GM ke ept rac k of when  the  character s p erf orm a cti o ns (a nd,t he ref o re, w heny ou roll d i ce ) s e e ms  less thani d e al,  give n t h e numb er o f actions each ch a racter can pot enti a l lyhav e , bu tthat could jus t b ea n  awkward  d escriptionand notan inten tional  chang e fromt h es tatusquoinApocalyps e W or l d. At t he  v e ry end  ofth e docu ment,i t sa y s  both sides must  risk t heirl ive s inor der for a ch aracter to  die, which  seems  toclash  with t he  TakeA S ta nd rules a s  currentl y wri tten, w he n on e c haract er c a n  risk  the ir  li fe withou t ot h er sd oin g so . Com pl eten ess: This game isso, so clos etob e ing al l  t h e  way there . A  fewt h ings liket he
 the_very end_of the document, it_says both_sides_must risk_their_lives in order_for a character_to die, which seems_to clash with_the_Take A Stand rules as currently written, when one character can risk their life_without_others doing_so.

This_is_another game very clearly inspired_by Vincent Baker, specifically Dogs_in the_Vineyard and Apocalypse World, but the addition of_Keys_(from TSOY), Conditions_(from any number of games), and GM-set target difficulties_for rolls makes it feel pretty_different. Also, the_whole_premise_feels much more like_The Mountain Witch + Lady Blackbird,_especially with the inclusion of Take_A Stand, which works like Trust in_tracking the arrangement of loyalties in_the group (and the fact_that the_title implies that some folks_are gonna die)._Honestly, having_the GM set_difficulties feels really weird in a_game as Baker-esque_as this; it feels unfair, somehow,_since_the numbers are_invented_on_the spot_rather than coming_from_GM prep._A_few other concerns: I worry a_bit_that the requirement to hit condition-style desires_at least every other_time_you hit a desire_will feel artificial, bopping back_and forth between them. Also, do_characters take_injury conditions_in order (as implied in some places) or based on the_fiction / GM’s choice (which the_wound rules seem to_imply)? Take_A_Stand is really_cool_but the_procedures need to be much, much clearer._Can I_roll against every other character involved_in the stand? Do_I_get the dice I buy to_roll against every other character or_do I have to pay_for_extra_dice each time? Do other_players also get to roll and_make adjustments to_the groupings or just the player taking_a_stand? If everyone can roll, this_could_take all night. How do you_know_when_the standoff is over? More_generally, having the GM keep track_of when the characters perform actions (and, therefore, when_you roll dice)_seems less than ideal, given_the_number_of actions each character can potentially have, but that could_just be_an awkward description_and not an intentional change from the status quo in_Apocalypse World. At the very end of_the document, it says both sides must risk their lives in_order for a character to die, which seems_to clash with the Take A Stand_rules as currently written,_when_one character can risk their life without_others_doing_so._Completeness: This game_is so, so_close to being_all the_way there. A_few things_like the