Generative resolution

[pemerton]

So I understand that Risk is the last thing you assess, and it determines if there's a roll.

Yes that's my point: risk has to be assessed, and if there is a risk then there are stakes, and a roll to see what happens. (The leverage step is analogous to the "credibility test" in some other systems.)

It's the opposite heuristic to BW. And I think assumes that risk will be worked out from fictional position. But in the context of relatively low myth play.

 

[zakael19]

Yes that's my point: risk has to be assessed, and if there is a risk then there are stakes, and a roll to see what happens. (The leverage step is analogous to the "credibility test" in some other systems.)

It's the opposite heuristic to BW. And I think assumes that risk will be worked out from fictional position. But in the context of relatively low myth play.

Is this just my general ignorance of BW's ideosyncracies here? I pulled out my copy of Mouse Guard, if we're talking about Obstacles/Tests, it looks like the procedure is for the GM to tell you there's an obstacle & what it is? And then the players decide how they overcome it, and roll? And then on a failed outcome the GM Twists or applies a Condition?

Is the inherent stake here just "do you overcome the obstacle?" eg pass/failure?

 

[Nytmare]

In my mind, "generative" has always meant that the narrative decision is informed by a chart or a table or a deck of cards. Something beyond simply "what makes sense."

It's definitely a grey area, but that phrasing has always meant to me that the initial spark of an idea starts with some random push that isn't only what's in the GM's or players' heads.