Search results

There was no "for me" in their statement. People on this forum (and maybe the internet in general) are really goddarn fond of absolute statements on subjective topics. I try my best to avoid them and talk instead from my personal POV or how I understand things because that's how I was taught to...

No, you think it removes the fun because it's not free-form. People who may enjoy engaging with a game and play while also weaving fictional statements that match their Wits skills, hoping they anticipate their opponent's argument, and come away with a Win without taking to many hits love it...

Nothing you say in a TTRPG matters until or unless the table or the relevant authority agrees it does. In a 4e skill challenge, what you say matters because it affects the fiction and then the relevant skill being rolled - the outcome between "threatening a street ganger to get info about the...

This is the internet, all we’re supposed to do is have strong opinions despite a lack of understanding or information! See you know, the endless back and forth about DW play you’re engaged in.

I threw it in there because @AlViking has used the term to describe at least part of their desires to retain total control over character interior in the last handful of pages, so I added "possibly" to account for people who dont go that far or care about that sort of thing. May I offer you a...

Somewhere in here we have the simple clash between "games where the character is not merely an extension of you, but modeled separately with the unexpected/unwanted" and "games where I desire to inhabit a character possibly with some wish fulfillment along the way" and then rules that facilitate...

Ok, last bit on this and I'm not bothering to respond on the "BW's Duel of Wit sucks" thread any more: A player in a random given D&D campaign has 0 agency on the resolution of the task. It's up to the GM to call for a roll, it's up to the GM to decide if any of their words have meaning / lend...

No we did this argument already, last Monday/Tuesday. I think it went on for 30 pages and nobody was satisfied. :P At least one person (maybe AlViking?) stridently said they strive to control all their emotions in real life.

You drive home the point by using the resolution mechanic of the game, countered by your opponent's rejoinder they "scripted." Each "Weapon of Wit" is tied to one or more possible tests/skills, representing the sorts of rhetorical tools at hand - and informing the dice pool (and various other...

So no, you must do what your Duel of Wits action is to get the benefit. If you're driving home a point, you as your character drive home your point. If you're deflecting an argument, you deflect. Etc. IT's the polar opposite of classic "say words until the GM feels like you've gotten somewhere"...

This whole thing came from somebody else saying "if players are allowed to roll or know outcomes, they will Play Bad Because Metagaming."

Yeah, motion to strike this specific sub-tangent from the discussion lol. I think we all wandered away from the fairly minor point @hawkeyefan was making.

I'm not sure we're talking about giving the player stuff without them doing anything, more the opposite? Like, using the meta channel to go "there's nothing to find here." Although this will probably depend on ruleset and stuff too, right? Like, if we're playing CoC or DG with the widely defined...

Well sure, if your chosen play style centers on withheld information then clearly giving it is going to spoil things. But like, I'm not seeing the agency loss here so long as you said "my character searches around" or whatever. Does agency here to you require more than ideation in character...

For each move in Duel of Wits, the player must do the thing - "Speaking the Part." I mean, insofar as any game rule can force you to do things. And then you roll. Does that answer your question? The point of the game is mechanize the back and forth of a verbal encounter, with each passage...

Can you expand a little more on this? Im really curious to understand how more information = less agency. Like, I thought the whole point of a CoC style mystery is constraining the heck out of player agency to preserve uncertainty and that ineffable feeling that you're "solving" something.

The implicit permission of a PBTA or FITD with its GM moves that say "when the players look to you for what happens next, do a thing" was really engaging for me to discover. And then when players ignore a clearly telegraphed problem, you do what you just said: show that the world has an opinion...

I keep citing the 2024 DMG to try and bring the OP's points back into play! It's interesting to see how it's swung the pendulum of general content and advice back towards what the 4e setup tried to do, but with the advantage of another decade + of general community growth and ideas around what...

Do you not think that a DW GM surprises players with what’s around the corner, or over the hill, or down through the dungeon? Like, say we’re playing real wide open DW where the players and GM are building the world out from the starting point (or doing it collaboratively during a session 0 or...

Yeah, absolutely. I’ve cited her repeatedly a couple hundred pages ago trying to understand how and why, because thats what she’s focused on in a really digestible way. We do This so That…