Recent content by The Firebird

+1 to both of these posts (I just quoted the start), which together make a pretty exhaustive case against fail forward. I'm not sure there's more to be said about it. Another way to frame it is to consider what is on the character sheet and what it represents. In fixed world games, it's the...

Too bad, I just moved from the area, or I would be there.

To your first point, what @FrogReaver said. To the one I've quoted -- likewise, my purpose is not to draw a circle around the concept of game and leave you outside of it.

I understand that this is how narrative systems do it. I don't care for this approach. I'm describing the reason for my preferences. For me games are about overcoming challenges and exploring a world. If that's not the case for you, no problem.

See thread title (and many comments made throughout)

I agree and this is a conclusion we reached a couple pages ago as well. I'll say the same thing I did then--if the main conclusion we take is that people who dislike narrative mechanics do so for well-founded reasons rather than reflexive conservatism, then that is a win to me. I think this...

Right, this is what I described. Is my understanding accurate, then?

We've talked about this and I believe I have taken it into account. My mental model is "roll is 7-9, GM performs a soft move to introduce a cook using the established fiction of the kitchen. They ask the players how the respond, only moving to a hard move (yelling an alarm) on a failure". Am I...

Quoting just a small part of this post because it has the most important bit. But...yeah it is a bad idea. Imo. I want to clarify first that it's not "nothing happens" which fail forward is avoiding. You get that without fail forward, when someone is hanging onto a rope and fails, or when the...

Hmm. I think it is a requirement traditionally. Checks are called for in certain circumstances -- you enter a new hex, you spend some amount of time -- that the players have control over.

Hmm. I think it depends on the content of the table. I'll hazard a thesis--the consequences must be defined far enough in advance that the PCs can take action to credibly avoid them. So if you fill in your table, putting a cook there is ok--but the the players have to still be able to decide to...

Yes, that seems ok to me. I guess if the table doesn't reasonably reflect the game state. E.g., a villain who is on continent A appears on the list with the same probability as one on continent B.

I don't think it matters when generation occurs as long as the rule used for generation is established beforehand. For example, the "cook is encountered on 2-in-6", it's fine for the roll to take place when the players would first see signs of the cooks presence. Yes, this seems ok to me at...

But you know...several of us here are curious about new things. I've played narrative games. I've run campaigns using them. And anyone who is still in this thread has stuck around for a while discussing these systems. This also doesn't read as a lack of curiosity. Maybe there are a bunch of...

Hmm, I'm not sure where this is going. I guess if you go to a big book of random tables and pull out "forest" and use that for your game, that's ok with me. Is that procedural generation? What if you roll d3 to pick from three separate books? Like I guess that doesn't bother me so much. It...