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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8151238" data-attributes="member: 82106">I agree that the player could be having agency in this situation, but you said yourself we cannot tell without details of things like how the possible attitudes towards the Moon Goddess were telegraphed, or what process the GM used to decide to include it. So, at best, the amount of player agency here is essentially 'borrowed from the GM' and not an inherent aspect of the system. It can be said to be inherent to a technique of play. So, we can discuss DMs and their techniques here, but all we can say of games similar to D&D is "they give us nothing by default." Which is all any of us have said...On the matter of non-scripted results and player defined success. This will vary by game. In BW the consequences are determined before any checks are made, in both directions. The player specifies an intent and a fiction, the GM describes failure. Now [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] states you can't back out at this point, but I think what he's really saying is that the stakes should already be clear/negotiated before the formal steps happen. In Dungeon World the principles of play and agenda of the GM pretty well circumscribe things. The GM could respond to a 6- with almost any sort of "hard move" in most cases, which could include serious consequences (damage, even death) but I would say that harsh moves against a PC when the stakes didn't seem to be that high would not be in keeping with those ideas. If you think about it, this is not really different from the core unspoken concept in D&D, where a DM who puts a CR10 monster on level 1 of a dungeon that level 1 PCs are sent into is probably doing it wrong (at least if he's not being very careful to telegraph this all to the players so they know how to react, and that they have an 'out').</blockquote>

Verification