Search results

This is maybe the most helpful post I've seen on the differences between those games and their resolution methods.

It actually doesn't. What it does is have a mechanic that generates a prompt for the GM to describe one of many possible fail forward states that the GM must then choose. The actual choice of fiction isn't dictated by that mechanic at all. But it's not just you. Most narrative proponents...

Why the heck would you think anyone ever confuse an imaginary thief for real people at the table? Are we idiots? Don’t answer that. But out of all the reoccurring criticisms this one absolutely boggles my mind.

That you are picking one instead of generating the result fully via a mechanic (like a table) is the quantum-like state (honestly describing this as quantum like probably harms the explanatory power more than helps but it’s a fairly common description so what can one do?) In an ideal, maybe...

To take a page out of the narrativist explanation - could it be because there’s a mechanic producing the cook instead of DM whim?

Define particularly challenging? It’s doing a lot of work here. Linear does not equal railroad :(

This whole thread has listed various reasons for that...

I've no idea the relevance of this point. If you mean there should always be multiple avenues to your goals, I don't agree. I think it's often preferable, but sometimes the fiction is such that there might only be one way. Maybe it's bad form and a social contract violation to run a scenario...

And it actually does! Because the DM put the work in outside the playspace at the table. I think it's silly to assert that in a game where everyone makes up everything that being reminded the GM is making stuff up would ever be an issue. Obviously something else is going on here. It's about...

One critique of your preference would be that if a player wanted to stealthily pick a lock, find the map in the house and get out without being seen that could easily be 4+ skill checks. An initial stealth check on entering. A lockpick check. An investigation check. A stealth check on the...

I mean that's essentially what the complaint boils down to. The cook isn't pregenerated and that lack of pregeneration impacts play in these ways, some good and some bad. The complaint obviously focuses on the bad.

Yea. I think the keyword there is 'in that moment'. Though I do think it's interesting that it still occurs for the DM.

Okay. Why would someone play for advancement vs not? I'm asking whether you can even evaluate whether one will generally be more successful at whatever challenges the game puts in your way. My impression is that the answer is most likely no. 1. The challenges change depending on your...

I think the dependence/indepedence of the roll and the quantumness of it are 2 separate things.

I was struggling to follow your reasoning on why quantum and why not earlier but this makes more sense. It's that you are viewing the scene from the players perspective. Essentially players in D&D don't encounter any player facing quantum resolution mechanics in their play and so from their...

Was it quantum before it was preestablished?

Can one not mechanically optimize characters in the 'typical games using fail forward'?

I see. The basic premise being that if it's instantiated early enough then you can adequately account for it in relation to the players actions?

I've been thinking and this seems like a good springboard. Why is a Random Table to determine the Cook's presence not quantum? Say 1-20 the cook is there and 21-100 no one is there. Why isn't this a quantum scenario? I don't think it is either, but curious on where you see the differences.

Thanks for engaging with the example.