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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8151592" data-attributes="member: 42582">Here are three actual play reports (the first I'm quoting from upthread, about BitD; the second is me posting as <a href="https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/burning-wheel-first-burning-wheel-session.736425/%22" target="_blank">thurgon on RPG.net</a>, about Burning Wheel; the third is me posting on these boards I think, though I can't find the thread and have taken it from a file on my hard drive - the system is Cortex+ Heroic Fantasy):These are three different systems, with different principles and techniques governing them. Some examples of these differences:* Burning Wheel and Cortex+ Heroic are both very scene-based, but I don't know about BitD. (AW is not, but I don't know if BitD differs from it in this respect.) * Burning Wheel and (I think) BitD both emphasise fictional positioning very heavily, whereas in Cortex+ fictional positioning doesn't normally count in resolution until it is filtered through a mechanical process (like the GM establishing a Scene Distinction or a player establishing an Asset). * Burning Wheel has a formal framework for players flagging Beliefs, whereas I think BitD doesn't and Cortex+ has Distinctions that are perhaps more like Aspects in Fate, as well as Milestones which are closer to Beliefs but aren't as central to the GM's framing as Beliefs are in BW.Despite this, there is a strong overall similarity in how they handle this situation:* the GM frames a situation which has an object/artefact of interest (the portrait; the feather; the mural); * a player has his/her PC engage with it because she sees it as something of interest to his/her PC; * there is a check declared to read it/attune to it/otherwise interpret or make sense of it; * the resolution of that check establishes, in the fiction, further details of that object/artefact - in the case of the successful check (to read the mural) that all goes the player's way, and in the other two failed cases the GM combine the players' ideas with their own to produce a "fail forward" failure narration.I would consider all of these episodes of play as exemplifying a reasonably high degree of player agency in respect of the shared fiction.</blockquote>

Verification