Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 7580073" data-attributes="member: 6696971">On CompetitionSo what you're saying here is that in your table's hierarchy of play priorities, (your perception of) "good roleplay" is a higher priority than "competition".  To wit, when play at the table puts these two priorities at tension, "competition" becomes subordinate (possibly to the extent of rendering it null) to (your perception of) "good roleplay".Is that correct? (if its not, I don't know what you're saying here, so I'd appreciate clarification in terms of play priorities and tension).If that is correct, I don't see how it disagrees with what I wrote at all.  I said the following:a)  Competition becoming subordinate (to anything really) challenges the authentic agency of the participants in dictating outcomes as an expression of their competitive interests, which in turn causes this particular moment of play to lose its "competitive integrity" (because competition in this case is a binary thing...just like with an egregiously bad call in sports completely changing the trajectory of play/dictating outcomes and undermining the participant's agency).b)   Do something else so you don't have Competition and (your perception of) "good roleplay" at tension (eg if "Trolls vulnerable to fire" isn't an adventuring zeitgeist that social creatures pass on from town to town to town to town until it becomes a foundational premise for travelers or defenders of the wall or spook stories alike...then change your Trolls to be vulnerable to Cold Iron, Silver, Radiance, et al for this game).On DiscoverySo I'm going to frame this in terms of Dungeon World because it does the best work in communicating my meaning.  See the bolded question above.  This is the one I'm referring to.  Pretend you're a player in Dungeon World and you have to answer that question.  Any good Dungeon World End of Session move is going to have each player answering this question as "yes" and then depicting their answer.Could you depict how you would answer this question if you were a player of an orthodox Troll encounter and you (the player) already knew that Trolls were vulnerable to fire but you've decided that your character did not.In case you need reference, here is an example of an answer for the PCs in one of my past Dungeon World games to that question and the brief game context for how this Discovery emerged in play:The Arcane Duelist in my game used the Cast a Spell move as the following:This complication triggered a soft move from me.  The PCs were looking to alert the Feywild about a Far Realm incursion into their home realm from the material world.  They got their alert, but their alert manifested as the malign presence of the Winter Court and specifically an Eladrin Fey Knight and a noble Bralani.  Summer Court vs Winter Court wasn't a thing in this game.  After a parley turned nasty because of snowballing move complications (and ultimate failure) between the two Summer Court Elf PCs and the Winter Court, it became a thing (a new Front in DW parlance).So this move complication created a Discovery...which snowballed into a Front (new source of antagonism) that wasn't a part of the game prior.</blockquote>

Verification