Search results

Yes. I had not recalled the example, and so reread it when it was linked by @AlViking … and there it was, clearly stated. Not sure why there’s any doubt…

It’s part of it, yes. But I also find that you just don’t need to worry all that much about separating what the players know from what the characters know. And in the few cases where maybe that does matter, I’ll play the card many others like to play… trust, Just trust your players not to be...

It’s very clearly stated that the guard heard the singing and came to see what was going on,

I don’t know. “Unconnected” seems pretty clear. And I would say all the consequences are clearly connected to the actions. Well, maybe if you follow the discussion along from previous posts the context is clearer? I don’t know how you'd read my comment and not see that it was about games where...

So what did your post have to do with what I said? I was asked how I handle a situation in this post from @Lanefan: The context of this question was about how I handle it in games where the GM makes no rolls for NPCs. Games like Blades in the Dark, Stonetop, and Spire. It was a question...

No… again, I don’t care if you like it or not. But the way in which you describe it… the reasons you give for not liking it, contain errors or misconceptions. This is what I was reaponding to: Fail forward isn’t like what you called OTAs. They don’t happen just because nothing’s happened in...

I think it is less a focus of play, for sure. Like, I cannot ever see play of a narrativist game devolving into a series of standard practices… play won’t i volve everyone poking everything with 10’ poles and following door protocols and the like. Which isnot something I miss at all! But that...

So?

First is you stop caring about the “metagame”. There’s just the game. Second, you telegraph danger ahead of time. Or at the very least, you establish what the likely risk is, the stakes of the roll. You let the player know “okay this sounds like a Stealth roll… what’s at risk here is...

I agree with your last paragraph. I believe many folks have a good idea of what they’re looking for in a game and select games and gaming methods accordingly. However, I also think that there’s plenty of people who don’t fully understand the things they’re claiming not to like. And when they...

Listen, I don’t have any kind of problem with a random encounter. But it’s not any different. And your rolling ahead of time doesn’t make any difference, except perhaps to allow you more time to prep it… but process wise it’s the same. The PCs are in a forest. I imagine a pretty big space. Your...

It was unclear to me if you were expecting a second action or not, that's why I clarified. But yes... a hard move should follow a soft move. So... I'd establish that someone's in the kitchen, on the 7-9 the character would get inside, but alert the cook. Then I'd ask what they do... and the hard...

Again, this depends a lot on the game. This is one of the reasons that "nothing happens" is seen as an undesirable result by some. However, personally, even when I'm running trad type games, I don't allow multiple checks for the same action, or dogpiling by every member of the party. So when...

And none of the comments made here since pointing out why the example you sited was incomplete or how it could be made to work have done anything? I mean, maybe they haven't changed your mind, but you can at least onboard the information and stop describing things as "unconnected" and "random"...

It doesn’t have to happen every time if you don’t want. Some games make Fail Forward an explicit part of the procedures. For other games, like D&D, it’s just there as an option. Also, for @Micah Sweet and @Maxperson and anyone else who thinks that people are just expressing their preferences...

How big of an area are we talking about? Is it like a wilderness hex? Or more specific than that? I mean... how can you predict with that level of accuracy where the PCs will actually physically be in that forest? How do you know to place the trolls on that exact spot? Or is it more a case...

I feel like these two sentences conflict to some extent. In the situation as described, the cook would be something in my mind as a possible complication or encounter. I wouldn't have odds like you describe because I would rely on a different method to determine when and how she shows up...

Wizard’s tower? I don’t know where that came from. I’ve been talking about the example that was linked with the cook and the kitchen.

Right… again, the example as presented was not great. It’s really incomplete and was only meant to give a basic idea of the fail forward method. It was woefully incomplete. As I said above to @The Firebird , I’d have telegraphed the presence of the cook. Probably the light of a cookfire and...

Yes… the area where the PCs are!