D&D General Fighting Law and Order

[Aldarc]

As someone who loves D&D and the Powered by the Apocalypse style, I'll admit to being disappointed by Dungeon World. What I wanted was PbtA with a dash of D&D and what I feel like I got was D&D with a dash with PbtA

...which goes back to my earlier point here:

While I like Dungeon World for bringing D&D-fantasy to PbtA, a lot of my issues with it are much for the same reason, particularly in how it leans into an older-school aesthetic* as it was in-vogue then. There are a number of PbtA fans out there who also take umbrage with DW for being "too D&D" and not "PbtA enough."

I have heard that Fantasy World RPG tries to move the game further in the PbtA direction, but I haven't gotten around to looking at it in closer detail.

I disagree with the value of using DW principles/mechanics to assist the game in question. I also provided advice much further up; to whit, that once the events in the game have occurred, they should be respected and the game should continue from that point.

Sure, and the lead designer of 5e D&D and other 5e 3pp contributors believe that there are valuable ideas from DW that can be imported into D&D.

In DW, Gandalf failed their check but Frodo succeeds. But it's not Gandalf that gets attacked, it's Frodo. That seems to be contrary to my understanding of the way the game works.

But it doesn't seem in anyway contrary to the how the game works from people who have actual experience playing and running the game. Funny that.

 

[bloodtide]

My children are anaphylactic to peanuts and allergic to tree nuts. While I do encourage players to bring snacks that they enjoy and to share, nuts are strictly forbidden. They do not enter the house. The players are informed of this before they come over.

I agree with this one, as it's much the same as I don't allow smoking in my house.

I do thank you for your answer, but do you have an example of one with no "medical part". Where someone is just doing something "because".

We tend to have a break midway through where we eat dinner together. If people tell us their food allergies / preferences ahead of time we will accommodate them. I know what it is like to be fed food that you cannot digest or is actively harmful, so I take my guest's needs into account. If they don't tell me that they are greatly allergic to lemons and we serve chicken piccata, that's on them because we ask ahead of time. We will prepare something for them, due to hospitality, but it will be not nearly as nice as what we planned.

I do not see this as "whim" or a frivolous desire.

But wait, you put it on the person with food allergies / preferences? Odd, no one liked that when I typed it. And why would it not be as nice?

Mostly I ask everyone to bring their own meal/take care of their own food requirements. But If I am having a group come over, and one person makes the demand that no one eat any eat, I'm not going to call up each person and forward on that demand. If that one person wants to call everyone and ask, I'm fine with that. I don't even consider unreasonable requests, so I will do what I want.

...I have literally no idea what this means, but it doesn't sound anything like Dungeon World either. "By the fiction" literally just means... whatever it is that's going on, and which the players have already encountered or will encounter very very soon. It's not some mystical thing. It's literally just the answers to the question, "what is the situation?"

Well, I don't know much about that game other then what is typed in the threads.

In your post you typed "You are very specifically and explicitly instructed to only trigger moves when the fiction requires it, and never for any other reason."

I think this is a great rule. Often when a GM does anything or takes any sort of game move, players will complain. Often players will add in all sorts of thier own reasons why they think a GM is making a move. Like a player might say "oh, the GM is just having a monster attack us as we are joking around" or "they are mad at us" or something like that.

"The Fiction" would be a great boon to the illusionisum of the game. When a GM makes a move, they can just quickly add "As the Fiction requires". And the players, beliving in that rule, will nod yes and say "by the Fiction".

Do you need a "shield" against players deciding that gravity points up today, or that the sun simply disappears from the sky, or that dirt is worth more than gold just for the next hour?

This is needed for some players.

Tell a player a potion of healing costs 1000 gold, they will just rant and rave and metagame and say "oh, the DM is just trying to use up and take all our gold to force us to go on the adventure"

Tell a player that a potion of healing costs 1000 gold, "By the Fiction" and they will nod yes and say "By the Fiction" and the game will roll on.

 

[Oofta]

The response to the character failing (Gandalf) and stalling was the GM announcing the approaching threat. The party ignored that threat to focus on opening the door.

We can interpret what follows in one of two ways here, both of which follow the fiction:

• Frodo succeeds at helping Gandalf, which helps give Gandalf the boost he needs to succeed at solving the riddle with a 7-9 result, triggering a GM soft move. GM chooses to follow up with ignored threat that they had previously established in the lake.
• Frodo succeeds at solving the riddle with a 7-9 result, which triggers a GM soft move. The GM acknowledges that success; however, their soft move is to have the tentacle monster attack Frodo. Why Frodo? To either (a) key off his mixed success or (b) the GM uses the fact that Frodo is the Ringbearer against him, and says that the monster is drawn to him.

Keep in mind one way that D&D is different to DW. In D&D, the DM declares that the monster attacks Frodo, and they roll to hit or grapple. He fails and is grappled. That's really all there is to it.

In DW, it's a little more involved. The GM may declare as a soft move that the tentacle monster bursts forth from the lake and reaches for Frodo, followed by the classic question "What do you do?" Frodo tries to avoid it, so that may trigger an additional move of "Defy Danger." Frodo fails and so the GM follows-up that fiction by saying that Frodo becomes grappled by the monster and is being pulled into the lake. Now the GM turns to everyone else: "You the tentacle monster grab Frodo and raise him over what you assume is its mouth, what do you do?"

Thanks for the explanation (even if I don't totally get it, but that's okay).

But in D&D, the tentacle monster may just be attacking randomly. In DW could it have attacked Sam who didn't contribute? For that matter, while It's been a while since I watched the movie and even longer since I read the book, in the movie it attacked multiple characters. A scene like that is straight out of a D&D session it doesn't seem to fit DW without bending rules.

In other words, in D&D monsters, PCs, NPCs all act independently. In DW things only happen in response to character moves. Right? Could Pippin or Merry avoided attacks by the tentacle monster by just sitting the fight out?

 

[Irlo]

Can anyone recommend a good, engaging DW demo or actual-play video that shows how these hard & soft moves (and fronts) work in practice? I started watching a couple that we’re just boring beyond endurance.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What should one do if thise events make it so it cannot continue from that point? Because the looming specter (not to over-use the term) of TPK, or an unplayable adventure, was specifically one of the issues brought up by the OP.

In that event, you start a new campaign (which I also recommended).

 

[Oofta]

Can anyone recommend a good, engaging DW demo or actual-play video that shows how these hard & soft moves (and fronts) work in practice? I started watching a couple that we’re just boring beyond endurance.

@Aldarc found some for me: https://www.enworld.org/threads/how-much-control-do-dms-need.697132/post-9008748

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, and the lead designer of 5e D&D and other 5e 3pp contributors believe that there are valuable ideas from DW that can be imported into D&D.

And? How does that affect my opinion?

 

[Micah Sweet]

...which goes back to my earlier point here:

I have heard that Fantasy World RPG tries to move the game further in the PbtA direction, but I haven't gotten around to looking at it in closer detail.


Sure, and the lead designer of 5e D&D and other 5e 3pp contributors believe that there are valuable ideas from DW that can be imported into D&D.


But it doesn't seem in anyway contrary to the how the game works from people who have actual experience playing and running the game. Funny that.

Because the game mechanics focus more on making drama than modeling a fantasy world. Which is fine if that's what you want. I don't.

 

[Gradine]

...which goes back to my earlier point here:

While I like Dungeon World for bringing D&D-fantasy to PbtA, a lot of my issues with it are much for the same reason, particularly in how it leans into an older-school aesthetic* as it was in-vogue then. There are a number of PbtA fans out there who also take umbrage with DW for being "too D&D" and not "PbtA enough."

Yeah. A big part of Dungeon World that turned me off the most was how it leaned pretty heavily on the OSR aesthetics. It was really not what I was looking for, but I'm glad that it exists for the people who were looking for exactly that.

I have heard that Fantasy World RPG tries to move the game further in the PbtA direction, but I haven't gotten around to looking at it in closer detail.

I'll have to check that out at some point.

 

[Aldarc]

Thanks for the explanation (even if I don't totally get it, but that's okay).

No worries. Happy to help.

But in D&D, the tentacle monster may just be attacking randomly. In DW could it have attacked Sam who didn't contribute? For that matter, while It's been a while since I watched the movie and even longer since I read the book, in the movie it attacked multiple characters. A scene like that is straight out of a D&D session it doesn't seem to fit DW without bending rules.

In other words, in D&D monsters, PCs, NPCs all act independently. In DW things only happen in response to character moves. Right? Could Pippin or Merry avoided attacks by the tentacle monster by just sitting the fight out?

@EzekielRaiden provides his explanation on that first question here. The short answer is, "Sure, if it makes sense in the fiction."

It is possible for the monster to attack multiple characters. The monster isn't necessarily bound by D&D's action economy. The GM may only focus on one PC at a time, possibly the one who answers first to the question "What do you do?" And since it has been established that the monster is attacking multiple PCs at the same time, the GM can also chain consequences - successes, mixed successes, and failures - between PCs. There's no initiative in this game. So the GM is responsible for shifting the limelight between the PCs as it makes sense in the narrative.

If Merry and Pippin chose to sit the fight out, then the GM could still turn and ask Merry's player: "Merry, you see your friend Frodo being grappled by this tentacle monster. Frodo has the bond, 'Merry always has my back when things get tough.' So what do you do with Frodo in this tough situation?"

And? How does that affect my opinion?

Obviously, it's not my place to tell you how it affects you. That's for you to decide, which you likely already have. I am, however, pointing out that there are clearly some prominent content creators in D&D who don't share your opinion on this matter. Simple as that. I understand you disagree. I understand that Dungeon World doesn't fit your preferred roleplaying playstyle. And I understand that you dislike Dungeon World. Gods know, it's not as if you haven't made that point abundantly clear already. I am neither trying to convince you to like or play Dungeon World nor am I in any way trying to invalidate your roleplaying preferences.