Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8699346" data-attributes="member: 16814">Sure, but you've skipped responding to those and go on trying to pin me down to a specific point I haven't made.  Yes.  Because if it's not framed in, or it's not part of the result of a move during play, the only other option is that the GM is applying it via fiat during play when they should not.  You've argued this isn't so but so far the examples you've presented for this have come down to applying the consequences of moves.  I've said a things should not be so.  I cannot prove this negative.  You have only to show a single case where it should be, but I haven't seen it, yet.Petty?  Okay. "However, you are limiting the situations where a locked door matters, only to those where said door was declared locked from the get-go; as part of some sort of "initial stakes". "This is untrue, since I also allow it can matter as the result of a check.  Look, if the GM has presented a door as part of a framing, but just left it there, then we don't know anything about if that door is locked or not.  It's something to discover through play.  So, then, the only way we can discover it is to have a character interact with it, at which point we can just let it be a door because it's not important if it's locked or not, or it is important and we need to play to find out.  It is not playing to find out to have the GM decide, based on whatever reasoning the GM has, if it's locked or not.  That way, the GM is not playing to find out, they're telling.  This isn't how it's supposed to work, so the only other way, once the door is established, to play to find out is for it to be the based on the outcome of a check.You argue this is not so.  Show me.  And show me where the game tells you to do this.</blockquote>

Verification