78. Et tu brutes?

Brutes are the last of the human threats. The good book defines them as such:

A brutes threat is a group of people, with or without a leader, acting in crude, perhaps provisional, concert (111)

Warlords and grotesques are individuals (though of course they can be associated with gangs). Afflictions are about an entire population (though of course they can take the form or individuals within or without that population). Brutes bridge these two poles to define social units, groups of two or more people with a shared identity.

At a purely mechanical level, brute threats exist to give guiding impulses to gangs and groups to let the MC disclaim decision making and say what honesty and prep demand when the paths of the PCs and group cross. Thematically, brute threats support Apocalypse World’s tension between the individual and the society that resides at the heart of the game. NPCs not only following their leading body parts, but they exist in a social context as well, feeling the tug of those social impulses. According to the essential threats, all PC-generated NPCs should be categorized as brutes (unless they are already a warlord or grotesque). So the individual has their own body part to lead them while at the same time existing within a group which in turn exists within the larger population, which ultimately exists within Apocalypse World.

The social identities can co-exist and crossover without ever erasing the individual identity. Back to the text:

An individual person within a group of brutes might not share the group’s impulse, and might even fight against it. It’s the group’s impulse, not necessarily any person’s.

Individual NPCs can even exist within multiple social groups. In the Moves Snowball sections we’ll see that Plover, Church Head, and Pellet belong both to Isle’s family and to Keeler’s gang. In a way, this layering of social organization mirrors the PC-NPC-PC triangles as a technique for creating three-dimensional characters out of a collection of one-dimensional impulses. Plover has his own drive, the drive of the Isle family, and the drive of Keeler’s gang all pulling at him, and following or rebelling against any of those impulses is perfectly in character. Each of those impulses is positioned to interfere with or aid the PCs at any given crisis.

Here are the 6 classifications of Brutes:

• Hunting pack (impulse: to victimize anyone vulnerable)
• Sybarites (impulse: to consume someone’s resources)
• Enforcers (impulse: to victimize anyone who stands out)
• Cult (impulse: to victimize & incorporate people)
• Mob (impulse: to riot, burn, kill scapegoats)
• Family (impulse: to close ranks, protect their own)

There are a couple of recurrences here that deserve a brief discussion. The first is the heretofore unused “anyone” and “someone” (at least they are unused in defining impulses). There are no direct objects in the impulses of the warlords and grotesques, and the affliction impulses only speak of “people” and a “population.” “Anyone” and “someone” cast wide nets, making the targets of the brutes’ impulses singular and broad. Anyone who is vulnerable is at risk of a hunting pack. Anyone with resources can fall victim to sybarites. Anyone who stands out can find themselves targeted by enforcers. And let’s be honest, everyone will be vulnerable, stand out, and have some resources at some time, which makes all these brutes looming and indiscriminate threats. Which brings us to the second recurrence: the word “victimize.”

Half of the brute threats are driven to victimize people, and those who aren’t victimizing are consuming resources, shutting outsiders out, or rioting, burning, and killing scapegoats (which is simply another way to victimize). The thematic revelation here is that more likely than not, when a group of people identify as a group in Apocalypse World, horrible things are going to happen.

What I find interesting is that the threat moves both back up and soften this view of group behavior:

Threat moves for brutes:
• Push reading a situation.
• Burst out in uncoordinated, undirected violence.
• Make a coordinated attack with a coherent objective.
• Tell stories (truth, lies, allegories, homilies).
• Demand consideration or indulgence.
• Rigidly follow or defy authority.
• Cling to or defy reason.
• Make a show of solidarity and power.
• Ask for help or for someone’s participation.

Bursting out in uncoordinated, undirected violence and making a coordinated attack with a coherent objective show the violent actions that lead directly to the victimizing of others. Rigidly following and defying authority and clinging to or defying reason define the all-or-nothing attitude that drives unswervingly toward trouble. But amidst those options is one of my favorite moves: tell stories. “Stories,” of course, covers a lot of things from lies and cautionary tales to origin myths and rumors of the world. Stories are a way for a community to talk to itself, to reinforce its way of life and its strongly held beliefs. Whenever two people gather they will tell stories. For goodness sake, telling stories is precisely what we do when we gather to play Apocalypse World. Having that little move tucked in this list humanizes and reveals the vulnerability of the very group that is bent of victimizing the vulnerable. “Ask for help or for someone’s participation” has the same effect. They don’t demand help or extort other for help; they ask for it. “Ask” is such a docile word. And when the brutes make demands, it is for consideration or indulgence. Together, the threat subcategories and the threat moves exist in beautiful tension, revealing the brutes’ humanity and monstrousness simultaneously. In Apocalypse World, it is often our pursuit of our own survival and tribal identity that allows us to deny the humanity of those we victimize, use, scapegoat, and close off.