Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7567335" data-attributes="member: 16814">Never played it, but I've read it and there's absolutely no way I'd even get close to calling Dogs a heavy GM prep game.&nbsp; I'm curious if you'd care to expound why you say it is.This is oddly formed.&nbsp; Your saying that only in cases where there is a possible fie present that SYORTD neans the GM outright allows your plan to succeed or combat ensues?&nbsp; That's not even close to what SYORTD means. As an exercise, in an OD&amp;D game, a player declares that they're going to find tge secret door into the guarded treasure room, bypassing the guards.&nbsp; The map key the GM prepared shows no secret door into the treasure room.&nbsp; How does this adjudicate?My answers:[/sblock] In OD&amp;D, the action declaration fails; no secret door is found and no mechanics engaged (except for obfuscation). The answer is no.In a SYORTD game, the DM can say yes, there is a secret door here, and set a new scene, or they can challenge the declaration by calling for a check.&nbsp; But, success on the check means the player intent is realized, while failure means it is thwarted in some way.[/sblock]No, the GM can decide the result is trivial and say yes to the declaration without engaging the Move mechanics at all.&nbsp; You can always say yes.Again, you seem to have a strange seperation of action declaration and content introduction.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's legit in DW to search for a secret door, which introduces the fiction that a secret door is present.&nbsp; The GM must honor thus by either saying yes, or calling for a check.&nbsp; This is what SYORTD means -- it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not an action declaration involves fiction introduction or not.I find it really odd that you cheer for [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] but still maintain this thinking.&nbsp; It's antithetical to how he plays.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7567335, member: 16814"] Never played it, but I've read it and there's absolutely no way I'd even get close to calling Dogs a heavy GM prep game. I'm curious if you'd care to expound why you say it is. This is oddly formed. Your saying that only in cases where there is a possible fie present that SYORTD neans the GM outright allows your plan to succeed or combat ensues? That's not even close to what SYORTD means. As an exercise, in an OD&D game, a player declares that they're going to find tge secret door into the guarded treasure room, bypassing the guards. The map key the GM prepared shows no secret door into the treasure room. How does this adjudicate? My answers: [/sblock] In OD&D, the action declaration fails; no secret door is found and no mechanics engaged (except for obfuscation). The answer is no. In a SYORTD game, the DM can say yes, there is a secret door here, and set a new scene, or they can challenge the declaration by calling for a check. But, success on the check means the player intent is realized, while failure means it is thwarted in some way.[/sblock] No, the GM can decide the result is trivial and say yes to the declaration without engaging the Move mechanics at all. You can [i]always[/i] say yes. Again, you seem to have a strange seperation of action declaration and content introduction. It's legit in DW to search for a secret door, which introduces the fiction that a secret door is present. The GM must honor thus by either saying yes, or calling for a check. This is what SYORTD means -- it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not an action declaration involves fiction introduction or not. I find it really odd that you cheer for [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] but still maintain this thinking. It's antithetical to how he plays. [/QUOTE]

Verification