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: 6783688" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I think we're in the same general orbit of "being on the same page" at this point.  And I'm fairly confident (given the above post and your posting history) that you are not someone who would be inclined to either (a) use Fail Forward as a general technique for determining how the situation changes, post-action-resolution, or (b) run games that systematize its usage.Since you've expressed that you're still uncertain, I'm going to create a truly bare bones example (to remove any potentially obfuscating details and because of your take on social mechanics):- Bob (PC) wants pudding.- Mount Pudding has pudding at its peak.- Bob therefore summits Mount Pudding (action) to retrieve said pudding (intent).A game where the technique of Fail Forward is deployed puts the retrieval of the pudding as the reference-point by which the fictional results of action-resolution are anchored/contextually framed.  As Bob attempts to summit Mount Pudding, whenever Bob's player fails a roll involved with the physical effort to summit Mount Pudding, the GM changes the situation.  However, the GM does not do so by solely referencing the causal logic chain of the action undertaken, say, a failed hazard navigation check:Bob, you fall into the crevice (with whatever mechanical result)!They may do that if it is sufficient to create an interesting setback to the retrieval of said pudding.  However, the GM may also change the situation by tying the setback directly to the retrieval of said pudding.  Failed hazard navigation?  Crap:Bob, you barely escape disaster by grabbing the edge of the crevice before you fall down into the deep dark (!)...but the leather strap holding your Pudding Divining Rod to your belt tears free and you hear the awful sound of it clanging off the rock as it cascades down...down...down (oh no!).  You going down after it or do you think you can find that dastardly evasive pudding without it?The latter is Fail Forward.  Action succeeds (Bob evades the hazard) while intent is compromised/complicated (retrieval of said pudding).</blockquote>

Verification