Search results

Yeah, I'm getting on my actual PC where I can type (ah, the joy of Model-M keyboards!), so lets see if I can be a bit more cogent: You use the word 'owns' and I have kind of just accepted that, but I don't think we mean precisely the same thing by that. In trad play 'GM Ownership' is sort of an...

Yeah, I have very little to say about whatever sorts of play go on in different groups. I'm not there. I played games that sound similar to what you describe between 1975 and about 1997 or so that I would describe as 'trad'. I've played in some even since then, though I have not run something...

Yet you keep posting...

Well, I'm not entirely sure about that either. I mean, the most obvious and straightforward AW game is basically 'Mad Max', but it is far from the only possibility. I've not played a ton of AW to be able to say what is most common. OTOH DW and similar games, which are equally specific about...

I think there's no big difference here. DW DR just leaves 6- up to the GM, presumably they make a soft move that follows. Honestly I don't think RaS even applies to something like this. It's probably just Act Under Fire, or if there's no pressure then you just succeed unless something has...

My response is that you are drastically limiting the game to dealing only with things you, the GM, decide on. I don't think you all see how nearly total your domination of the content of play is. I'm just not interested as a player in being stuck in that box!

There's NO established world at all. The apocalypse is not described nor constrained in any way. The premise is simply that civilization as we know it, no longer exists, for some undefined reason. The characters have obviously survived and it's up for grabs what sort of life they have. The game...

Again, nothing changed. Presumably in the fictional world we are to imagine the runes always represented a map. While I agree that 2 minutes ago that imagined fact didn't exist, many other things are also not yet established in the fictional world. All that I can see really being objected to is...

The MC is now going to make a move. Guess what? That 'worst' is about to manifest! If a thief studied a lock in DW, I would trigger Discern Realities and they'd roll. On a 6- the lock might be trapped, and you're now poisoned with deadly red jellyfish toxin! You recognize the symptoms, and...

What is being said by Harper is that the MC decides things like what an NPC says, or how the psychic maelstrom manifests its influence in a given situation. But the setting is not a predefined thing, and the game doesn't work by having the MC tell you that finding water is impossible because...

What 'actually is' here that's being changed???!!! There's no real runes, there's not even a fiction of what these pretend runes 'mean'!!! So, nothing the character did, fictionally changed anything except their knowledge of the runes' content. That seems entirely diegetic to me. In the real...

Except here you are still left standing in front of the locked door. When we say that the situation has changed, it's a material change, not merely a difference in information. I understand what you're saying, it's possible some situations are ambiguous. Still, in general, we have moved on. Some...

Well, I think that the sorts of goals and how they relate to the setting matters. BitD has a setting, but the entire focus is on the life of the PCs and crew within that milieu. I think Egri's description is good, it's discussed here: Revisiting GNS – lumpley games

There is no 'setting' in AW, it's a purely Zero Myth game, beyond identifying a genre (post apocalypse). Player's choices of play book will then establish some constraints on the fiction. If there's a Hard Holder, then a hold exists (a refuge or base of some kind) etc. Normally at that point...

I'm not so sure. I mean, I agree that's the simplest level of play, but let's imagine I'm playing DW, and I'm fleeing from some terrible monster. I come to a dead end. I Discern Realities. I get a 10. There are kind of limited options available to the GM here! Some sort of fiction is required...

Yeah I stand corrected. In DW bonds are written during the session wrap up, along with allocation of XP for certain things, and leveling up or other 'house keeping' tasks. So not in character. And I agree that the criteria for bonds is very much focused on game or narrative considerations, like...

The authoring of fiction in Narrativist play is quite structured, in general. For example in DW the 'blacksmith scenario' could proceed in several ways: 1. The GM describes such an NPC as part of some PC action declared by a player; like asking around town for one. 2. The GM asks some question...

Right, so 4e is of course a bit different from BW in that it's not specifically adjudicating intent at the level of a specific check. It can, but that's normally left to the SC. A given check then determines the new SC tally, and some fiction follows which supports moving it on to a materially...

I OTOH am not understanding a distinction. Either way the GM made fundamentally the same calculation, that a map would be fun. In both cases the GM chose, and both cases present the same fictional causality, and map it in the same way to actual causes.

I think this brings us closer to an understanding. Dungeon World repeatedly admonishes the participants, especially the GM, to speak to the characters. Also to speak as the NPCs. Thus you ask "Thor, what are trying to do here?" Not "John, what do you want Thor to do?" This is exactly what...