Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8613058" data-attributes="member: 70468">Your post did not say that when I responded to it. I don’t know why the forum software is not reflecting an edit, but changing the content of your post that much to make me look like I’m out of touch isn’t cool.You changed the context of the discussion after I responded and continue responding assuming the original basis. Again, not cool. Insinuating that I am further presuming insincerity on your part is also not cool.Responding back to the “it’s not a video game” line of argument: but it is a game. That’s something that gets lost sometimes in certain play styles. The mechanics aren’t subordinate to the story. They’re a mechanism for creating new story. If the GM decides an outcome, that denies everyone (the players and the GM) the possibility of experiencing something new and unexpected. This is different from e.g., traditional D&D. Neither are wrong or bad. It’s just different.Regarding who suggests a move, I think it’s fluid. I’ve quoted below what Apocalypse World has to say about that. I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong if the MC is usually the one to call out. The point is that when a move triggers, you (to quote AW) make with the dice.That’s not the argument I’m making. I’m only discussing PbtA games because they are up front about what they say you should be doing. For other games, it’s going to depend on the game. For example, I should think it would be unprincipled not to do like you say in a traditional D&D game because the point is to play to experience the story. If the mechanics would screw that up, it behooves you not to follow the mechanics (hence the use of fudging, quantum ogres, and so on). Again, neither bad nor wrong. Just different.For PbtA, it’s pretty specific about what it’s about. One can create new playbooks and new moves, but the core engine and agenda are the same. You’re supposed to play to find out what happens. Removing the ability to decide from the GM is a means of accomplishing that. And if you do decide to shift your agenda, then you’ve got more work to do than just what I mention above.Speaking from my own experience, I briefly tried using PbtA-style resolution (and countdown clocks) in my homebrew system. My agenda is to treat the campaign as an experiment (an attempt at doing Purist for System in a D&D-like game). It took only one session to see how that was fighting what I wanted to do. If one wants to do something similar to PbtA (drift it to another agenda), it’s going to take more work than just new playbooks and moves. But I digress.No, it’s basic deduction. According to PbtA, you never roll unless a move triggers (see below). I also assume that we both agree that the purpose of a fortune (i.e., roll) is to decide an uncertain outcome — because why suggest a GM could decide not to roll under circumstances that are impossible or (presumably) a sure thing. Therefore, given that the purpose of a roll is to decide an uncertain outcome; and that if a move is triggered, then a roll is made; it follows that if a move is triggered, then its purpose is to decide an uncertain outcome. QED.</blockquote>

Verification