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: 7750507" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Those guys at your stores at the end of the 4e era?  Man, I wish you would have mentioned that it was those guys.  That would have saved me a lot of writing.I talked to those guys at your stores right after you talked to them.  They all were just pulling your leg.  It was a troll-job.  They wanted to see if 6 years later you would use the (faked) testimony of some dudes at game stores at the end of the 4e era as evidence for a conversation on an internet forum!  Now that you're convinced and that is settled, lets cycle back to something I posted earlier in the thread that didn't get any traction.  Hopefully that can spark some actual interesting conversation.So Dungeon World is several orders rules-lite-er than any brand of D&D.  No Initiative, or combat rounds, and spatial relationships/ranges for interaction/attack are just fictional descriptors (actual natural language; eg "whites of their eyes", "shouting distance", "hand's reach and no further") rather than numerical units that interface spatially with other units (that also have numerical units to measure things like speed, range, etc).  Yet, even when I'm running Dungeon World I'm still using a hand-drawn map to represent where creatures are with respect to each other and with respect to battlefield obstacles/terrain.Why is that?If a player declares an action/makes a move, I want to make sure that they know (and I know) precisely:1)  what may impede their capacity to do so without having the fiction change dynamically (either positively or adversely) before that move can fully materialize...and/or 2)  whether or not there is one or more obstacles in the way that might require a Defy Danger (the DW equivalent of a D&D saving throw) in order to get to the point where the fictional trigger for their declared move will occur (thereby allowing them to make their playbook/world move).This affords them optimal agency within the parameters of the system and within the fiction.  Otherwise, I would have to fiat away all the mechanical interactions with either a hand-wavey "yes" or (potentially perceived as) an adversarial "no".  Even in a rules-lite system like DW, my agency as GM would be importing a heftier signal than I would have otherwise if the player would have been able to navigate those spatial relationships beforehand by referencing even a roughly scrawled map-as-proxy (with spatial relationships/Tags).</blockquote>

Verification