NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 8928458" data-attributes="member: 4937">Is "I can fly for 5 minutes!" more recontextualizing the scene than, "I can leap over haystacks!"?  In both cases, that assertion being made is something that preexisted the scene.  Neither character has discovered anything new about the scene.  Each has just asserted what they could already do in the context of the scene.  In the context of Superman is stopping bank robbers, "I am bulletproof!" is not recontextualizing the scene at all.  Everyone knows at the start of the scene (except maybe the hapless bank robbers) that Supes is bulletproof.  Asserting his bulletproofness or his ability to bend iron bars is asserting anything new about the scene.  I mean at some level there is more in the toolbox for casters than non-casters, albeit usually resource constrained and balanced by a general squishiness and ineffectiveness when not using magic (that some later editions break by over giving to casters to create more 'balanced' or at least uniform play styles across classes).   But it's more a matter of the scope (quantity) of what they may assert casting a spell, particularly if spells are written in a very binary manner with few limitations (which low text terse versions of a spell usually suffer from) than it is a difference in kind.  I'm reading the Dungeon World SRD right now (again) just in case I missed something and I just don't see it.  Dungeon World moves as written don't allow you to narrate any more than a D&D proposition would.  In fact, they are just encoding the most common sorts of D&D propositions.  But so does any Proposition->Fortune->Resolution cycle.</blockquote>

Verification