A "theory" thread

What? I may be being confused by jargon, but, of course you can.
You listen at the door. You have 1 in 6 chance of hearing something, 2 in 6 as an elf, with better odds as a thief of increasing level. If you succeed you hear something if there is something to be heard.
Yes, but what use is it for the player to ask if they hear snoring? I mean, maybe AFTER the GM says you hear 'something' you might ask "is it snoring", perhaps. Mostly I was just pointing out that the content of fiction is entirely the domain of the GM.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Why is this a good Burning Wheel example?
I am only passingly familiar with the core BW game. I would simply observe that it would be a pretty solid start to a Dungeon World game. TECHNICALLY the technique is supposed to be "ask questions (as the GM) and use the answers" where here the players clearly are rather familiar with each other and how they play, so they're just freewheeling it. From this point the GM probably WOULD start asking more specific questions, though PC creation (pick playbooks, allocate attributes, select starting equipment, special abilities, bonds, alignment, and race) would happen first, probably with some questioning to ascertain the significance of each choice and what it says about the setting. After that the GM will probably ask some questions that form the equivalent of a 'kicker', placing the PCs in a specific starting scene.

So, I expect its a reasonable BW start of a game too, as I am pretty sure BW itself assumes a fairly low myth style of play.
 

Why don't you use your knowledge of BW to provide your own thoughts?
I have none, other than the latest edition is a very pretty, thick, digest sized book that was at too high a price point to pick up at the time as an impulse purchase.

Mostly I was just pointing out that the content of fiction is entirely the domain of the GM.
I see. Yes, pretty much.

TECHNICALLY the technique is supposed to be "ask questions (as the GM) and use the answers" where here the players clearly are rather familiar with each other and how they play, so they're just freewheeling it. From this point the GM probably WOULD start asking more specific questions, though PC creation (pick playbooks, allocate attributes, select starting equipment, special abilities, bonds, alignment, and race) would happen first, probably with some questioning to ascertain the significance of each choice and what it says about the setting. After that the GM will probably ask some questions that form the equivalent of a 'kicker', placing the PCs in a specific starting scene.
Okay. I ask because it was similar to the conversations that I have at the beginning of my D&D campaigns. This didn't seem really revelatory to me. How can I build interesting and entertaining adventures without knowing why the PCs are adventuring? I guess that this is explictly stated to be a good thing in BW?
 


I don't understand the question.
You mentioned previously an abridged pre-game example of BW, if I understand correctly. This process seemed to explicitly go over PC motivations, personal complications, and possible avenues of adventure that would have greater meaning for said characters. I take it this is something that is explicitly stated as a good idea in BW? Is there a particular method or rubric for this process?
 

You mentioned previously an abridged pre-game example of BW, if I understand correctly. This process seemed to explicitly go over PC motivations, personal complications, and possible avenues of adventure that would have greater meaning for said characters. I take it this is something that is explicitly stated as a good idea in BW? Is there a particular method or rubric for this process?
Yes. It's in what was the Adventure Burner, now called the Codex.
 

Okay. I ask because it was similar to the conversations that I have at the beginning of my D&D campaigns. This didn't seem really revelatory to me. How can I build interesting and entertaining adventures without knowing why the PCs are adventuring? I guess that this is explictly stated to be a good thing in BW?
Well, sure, but D&D is not low myth. The GM will build some sort of milieu, adventures, etc. Often this is done before character generation, maybe before consultation with players. In DW a steading, maps, and fronts all follow after play starts and build ONLY on the elements which come out of play. Later the GM will invent at least one plot that is ongoing and relates to the PCs but isn't driven by them.

Basically though what was presented in that conversation would shape all that. The 'Sheriff' would come around, the local church would help the PCs, but maybe the 'Bishop' would support the 'bad King' etc. Maybe the GM will work in some elves or something too.
 


Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
"Low myth"? That's a new term. Okay.

There's no reason why that can't happen, but I certainly agree that is not commonplace or the expectation.
Well the term might be new to you, but the idea shouldn't be. If they'd said low setting load would that have made more sense? The idea is that D&D, generally speaking, has a huge load of pre-written setting stuff. This is not the case with some other games.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top