Recent content by AlViking

Plenty of people have talked about "the players do a [hard or soft] move so as GM I respond with a [hard or soft based on what the players did] move". That's different from how I run my game. If a character fails to open a lock, nothing happens because they failed to open the lock, although...

:sigh: Yes you are pedantically correct. I still enjoy the stories that emerge from play. Better?

So you deny that there are games that if a player does X the GM responds with Y?

Complain? I'm not so sure. More like making a joke at the expense of people that don't change for the sake of change.

Like I said, we want different things out of games. I'm still enjoying "doing that" and narrative games just don't ring my bell.

Meanwhile knowing that there is something beyond the door has unique character is one of the things I enjoy. :)

Do you disagree that there are some games that have the concept of a move triggering a counter move of similar level? Hard move on player's side triggers a hard move on the GM side of things or similar? Because that's all I was talking about. There are other aspects that I don't care for -...

First, I didn't say my impression applied to all games. Second, I would find MH restrictive because the game has told you what you're going to be and what your goals are. I also don't want something like character development forced on me as a goal. There is nothing wrong with that (and not...

Change simply for the sake of change doesn't buy anything for me. I'm not playing D&D because I'm in love with the rules (although I do like them), I'm playing D&D because it still lets me tell new stories when I DM and enjoy new stories when I play. Personally I would call my approach...

In my game one of the characters suggested using "dwarven lockpick" aka his hammer when the rogue rolled a 1 and jammed the lock*, they ended up having the druid shapeshift into a regular spider and crawl under the door. Even if they hadn't done that the adventure still wouldn't have been over...

I don't care what my players spend time doing unless it's something like having their characters torture someone which I've said in session 0 is not allowed. I will do my best to make it interesting. Because I never, ever, care about stakes in the sense that you do. I have obstacles in the way...

Failing to pick a lock will never lead to a dead end in my game. The person they were chasing might get away, they may have to find an alternate route, they may have to break the door down which may or may not trigger consequences. Interesting things aren't artificially triggered in the games...

Fair enough. Although I will clarify that the players get to decide how or even if they're going to play with a toy. For that matter, if there's a toy they don't have they can always ask for it and if they like one type of toy over another I'll provide more of their favored toy.

I don't see it really being all that different in some ways than most other games, including traditional ones. If we're playing D&D, they know we're doing D&D fantasy and as a group we discuss general themes, things we're okay with or not, and then talk more specifics about the tone of play...

If I do a "you're all strangers" it would be some dangerous situation they get thrown into. A shipwreck, invading army, they've been temporarily conscripted, something. Generally only happens with a new group, normally we start thinking about the next campaign a fair amount ahead of time.