Corruption mechanic in AW; hard-code it to the miss or leave it to the MC?
I’ve been porting a DCC-style corruption table into Apocalypse World for my home game. Basic idea: when weird stuff goes wrong you pick up a permanent mark. Mutations, creepy tells, whatever. They stack up over a campaign and never heal.
The question is the trigger. My first instinct was just: miss on a weird roll (open your brain especially), roll on the table. Players know exactly what they’re risking before they touch the dice.
But my friend’s argument is that this steals the miss from the MC. A 6- is the MC’s cue to make as hard a move as she likes. So by that logic corruption should just be another hard move on her list (“inflict a corruption mark”), picked when the fiction actually points there.
I keep flip-flopping. Her version feels more correct to me, more in the spirit of the game. But some players have said pretty directly that knowing the exact stakes is the only reason they’re brave enough to open their brain at all.
Is there an actual principle here for when a hack gets to hard-code a consequence onto a miss vs. routing everything through MC choice? AW itself has “on a miss…” text on some moves, so there’s precedent both ways. Examples from published hacks that handle this well would be really helpful.