I think the campaign frames cover this pretty extensively? See: motherboards paragraph on changing all magic to tech.
A shoutout here would’ve been good if missing tho.
Let's Read Daggerheart +
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
I think the campaign frames cover this pretty extensively? See: motherboards paragraph on changing all magic to tech.
A shoutout here would’ve been good if missing tho.
Page 296 talks a little bit about how to reflavor magic as tech, but it doesn't actually discuss how that might impact the narrative when Fear comes up or similar.
Although now that I look for it, I don't actually see an explicit discussion about how to interpret rolls with narrative in mind. It goes into detail about GM moves and fear results in conflict. Maybe I am missing it, though. Some things seem spread apart in the book.
There’s a long discussion on 154+ about using fear, and narrative stuff under Making Moves on 149 with explicit ideas on “how to choose a move” on 150 that has the various roll outcomes.
It's weird because there are some people worried about getting exhausted by having to come up with a innovative description of rolls EVERY SINGEL TIME, and I don't actually think the game tells you that you have to do that.
Yeah the metacurrency stuff can be enough (tick a stress, take disadvantage forward to follow up, whatever); and then bringing in
overgeeked
Open-World Sandbox
The trouble with the Fear and GM moves thing and people worried about that being exhausting, like it can be in PbtA games, is that it all depends on which explanation of Fear and GM moves you read because they're all different. Unfortunately.
p18. "If you instead roll with Fear on your Duality Dice—meaning your Fear Die rolled higher than your Hope Die—the GM gains a Fear that they can spend on certain effects. Sometimes a Fear roll introduces other complications into a scene (even if you succeed on your roll)."
p90. "Fear: When you roll your Duality Dice and the Fear Die rolls higher than the Hope Die, you roll with Fear. When this happens on an action roll, even if you succeed, the GM gains a Fear and there are consequences or complications that come from the action you were attempting."
p91. "As a player, rolling with Fear doesn’t mean your action roll fails. Instead, you face a complication or consequence. For example, your character learns only some of the information they need, suffers a counterattack from the adversary they just struck, or encounters an unexpected danger or hazard. If you fail the action roll where you rolled with Fear, those consequences or complications are worse.
When you roll with Fear, you don’t record it on your character sheet. Instead, the GM gains a Fear and makes a move to reflect the complications of your Fear roll. The GM can spend the Fear they gain on effects such as spotlighting an adversary or making Fear moves (see the “Spending Fear” section on page 154)."
p94. "ON A SUCCESS WITH FEAR…
You get what you want, but it comes with a cost or consequence. The GM gains a Fear."
p94. "ON A FAILURE WITH FEAR…
Things go very badly. You probably don’t get what you want, and a major consequence or complication occurs because of it. The GM gains a Fear."
p95 has examples of both of the above. In each example there are both consequences and the GM fets a Fear.
Throughout the book there are plenty of call-out boxes with examples of play. Near as I can tell, all of them that feature a Fear roll include both consequences and the GM gaining Fear. Including the extended example of play.
p138. The debrief just after the extended example of play seems to suggest it's either a Fear or consequences in the moment.
p143. "Because the GM can choose to make a move in response to a player’s failed roll or a result with Fear, and since every roll generates Hope or Fear, only ask the players to roll during meaningful moments to ensure that every roll contributes to the story."
p149. "Consider making a GM move when a player does one of the following things:
• Rolls with Fear on an action roll.
• Fails an action roll."
And that's enough of that even though I'm barely halfway through the book.
But I think the point is more than made. The book is inconsistent on this point. But the two main versions are: 1) The GM gains a Fear and imposes consequences, or; 2) the GM gains a Fear and can optionally impose consequences. Neither interpretation is correct and neither is incorrect because both can find supporting quotes from the book itself.
Unless there's a third option where GM moves and the consequences of a Fear roll are somehow two distinct things dealt with separately.
p18. "If you instead roll with Fear on your Duality Dice—meaning your Fear Die rolled higher than your Hope Die—the GM gains a Fear that they can spend on certain effects. Sometimes a Fear roll introduces other complications into a scene (even if you succeed on your roll)."
p90. "Fear: When you roll your Duality Dice and the Fear Die rolls higher than the Hope Die, you roll with Fear. When this happens on an action roll, even if you succeed, the GM gains a Fear and there are consequences or complications that come from the action you were attempting."
p91. "As a player, rolling with Fear doesn’t mean your action roll fails. Instead, you face a complication or consequence. For example, your character learns only some of the information they need, suffers a counterattack from the adversary they just struck, or encounters an unexpected danger or hazard. If you fail the action roll where you rolled with Fear, those consequences or complications are worse.
When you roll with Fear, you don’t record it on your character sheet. Instead, the GM gains a Fear and makes a move to reflect the complications of your Fear roll. The GM can spend the Fear they gain on effects such as spotlighting an adversary or making Fear moves (see the “Spending Fear” section on page 154)."
p94. "ON A SUCCESS WITH FEAR…
You get what you want, but it comes with a cost or consequence. The GM gains a Fear."
p94. "ON A FAILURE WITH FEAR…
Things go very badly. You probably don’t get what you want, and a major consequence or complication occurs because of it. The GM gains a Fear."
p95 has examples of both of the above. In each example there are both consequences and the GM fets a Fear.
Throughout the book there are plenty of call-out boxes with examples of play. Near as I can tell, all of them that feature a Fear roll include both consequences and the GM gaining Fear. Including the extended example of play.
p138. The debrief just after the extended example of play seems to suggest it's either a Fear or consequences in the moment.
p143. "Because the GM can choose to make a move in response to a player’s failed roll or a result with Fear, and since every roll generates Hope or Fear, only ask the players to roll during meaningful moments to ensure that every roll contributes to the story."
p149. "Consider making a GM move when a player does one of the following things:
• Rolls with Fear on an action roll.
• Fails an action roll."
And that's enough of that even though I'm barely halfway through the book.
But I think the point is more than made. The book is inconsistent on this point. But the two main versions are: 1) The GM gains a Fear and imposes consequences, or; 2) the GM gains a Fear and can optionally impose consequences. Neither interpretation is correct and neither is incorrect because both can find supporting quotes from the book itself.
Unless there's a third option where GM moves and the consequences of a Fear roll are somehow two distinct things dealt with separately.
That's what I was wondering: is the GM move the consequence?
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I'm not really seeing a meaningful inconsistency. But maybe I'm being dim? It does happen!
But those aren't in opposition to each other, are they? I mean I'm not seeing how from your explanation.
2 is merely a subset of 1. You can choose not impose consequences/cost, it's not absolutely mandatory.
I'm looking at p.138 and I'm not seeing anything that "seems to suggest" it's either/or as immediately obvious. Which phrase specifically would say implies this? You quoted the exact phrases elsewhere and this important because this is the one place it would be inconsistent.
Even then, I think this kind of microanalysis can applied to pretty much any RPG if you really want to find inconsistencies. The broad seems clear - if you succeed or fail with Fear, the GM gets 1 Fear token and your success/failure has some kind of negative consequence or cost, though the DM can optionally decide to let you off (I think more likely they probably influence a consequence/cost that's basically meaningless, that's going to happen a bunch anyway, I've met DMs, even they aren't trying to it'll happen!).
I think it could be linked to it, but it's not hard-tied, because you get a GM move on failure with Hope as well. The only time the GM doesn't get a move is critical success or success with Hope.
A GM move is everything you do as a GM. I think there’s also a bit of a split how you handle Fear generation explicitly for intrusions/triggers in combat and in a more general sense in the flow of play.
Sometimes Taking a fear is enough, sometimes you may want to do more. It’s definitely more on the FITD side of GM moves in this regard.
Sometimes Taking a fear is enough, sometimes you may want to do more. It’s definitely more on the FITD side of GM moves in this regard.
MrTemplar
Explorer
I think that if you do want to track food etc and use the above consumable rules, setting a countdown to forage, scavenge, hunt or otherwise obtain food when you are out and then have the players mark stress if they have not found any when the countdown ends, would work well together.
Similar Threads
