Search results

But in both these examples there was no change in situation beyond new information being established? So I guess it doesn't make them exactly classroom examples of fail forward according to @AbdulAlhazred at least? And the concern about the consequence should be matching character intent or...

Ok, guess I read the entry incorrectly. I thought the "but" was reflecting back on the answer to the question. But it is rather that you get to ask the question, but have to be prepared for the worst anyway. Thank you for clarifying! I don't think this is the only game affected by this...

You might want to have a chat with @Campbell and @AbdulAlhazred ref the posts quoted in They both liked this attempt at summarising their positions. I am just the messager.

If what the players want is so precious to them, maybe you should consider have that drive the story for a while, rather than denying it based on a single roll, and insert your own completely unrelated GM decided thing to do instead? A failed roll is still a loss without destroying the price...

Please tell me how that in any way shape or form connected with the phenomenom I described? Yes these are things that is in these games, but I absolutely fail to see how they in any way adresses the issue at hand.

As a GM I am absolutely not interested in doing content generation myself. I find myself attracted to prewritte adventures, but I have run 3 massive homebrew campaigns. In all of these practically all content has been directly inspired by player input. In the first the premise of what was going...

I got another flaming torch to throw. I just realised that the current descriptions of fail forward sound awfully lot like forced railroading. As long as the players roll high, they are ensured agency in that everything go as they hope. However, roll low, and the GM has to introduce something...

By the formulation, I still assume they are only allowed to answer the one question selected? That is they are still just allowed to provide information. Very well that the information might be "there is a sniper on the tower that has you locked in", but wouldn't it require another move for the...

Except it has been pointed out by other in this thread that the player's hopes are not supposed to enter the picture at all, as the action declaration is required to be an expression of the characters hope. Ref don't be a weasel. And it is right that nothing was changed in the rune-example. The...

Are you saying gathering information is not a change in situation? How do this jam with AW's Read a Sitch and Read a person? On a miss you still only get information ("but expect the worst"). Is that a blatant violation of fail forward? How would your analysis change if I simply reframe the pick...

I didn't reply to this in my previous post, as this seem like a possible branching to a more constructive path: What rules and principles are in place to protect against this? (I really hope it is something more substantial than "there wouldn't be scenes on streets with unimportant houses, as...

Nope. The entire point is that the popularity show that there are definitely players that do have a taste for failure, which was intended to contrast with your claim "(...) then there is no reason for the players to prefer failure." You could argue the conditions you stated is enough to persuade...

Have you ever played fiasco? That game is all about stuff failing spectacularly for your characters. That game has an audience. Yes, there are reasons for certain players to prefer dramatic and cool failure over having their shenanigan go exactly predictably as planned - no matter how dramatic...

Agreed :) Just wanted to make sure the term was understood and used correctly. (Edit: And the tickled door is quite related to the lock itself ;) )

I don't understand where those assumptions might possibly come from, as I am certainty not assuming any such thing? The closest I could see for the first assumption would be the place I pointed out 2 and 3 might not work for "groups that really seek mayhem and drama". I do not know what your...

Seem like a very strong change in situation. From "Do I manage to pick this lock?" To "What the **** should I do now?" Edit: This would be the problem. The circumstance may also have changed similarly drastically from "There is a sweet lock, should be easy entry for someone with my skillset"...

Door remaining locked can very well be adequate. But there might be guards chasing you around, or all your lockpicks are now trash, or the door has suddently started laughing hysterically because you tickled it too much. All of these are dramatic changes to the situation, and I think that might...

How do you define "situation" in a way that exclude my example, and still matches everyday usage?

It is called fail forward because even if the roll fails, the story is pushed forward? I thought that was well recognized by now? Succeed with consequences is just one possible flavor of fail forward. Not all systems enshrining fail forward in their rules allow succeed with consequences. Edit...

So, no retry on failure is fail forward? The situation has changed: The task attempted is no longer available. Seem like we can finally conclude this conversation then :D