Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8992072" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Anything consistent with established fiction. Just as players need to show trust in their GMs and those GMs' ability to run a good game, GMs need to show trust in their players and their respect for the premise and concept of the game.DW does not use "turns" as such (combat is more freeform than that), so that concern does not really apply. If it is already established in the fiction that the chandelier is nowhere near the ogre, then the player should already know that, and thus never even consider the attempt for exactly the same reason that they wouldn't consider sliding down the bannister of a staircase that was explicitly described as having no railing (or one where the railing has been broken "on camera" etc.): The fiction doesn't support the action. If the player has simply forgotten, then the other players and GM can remind them, but such forgetfulness should be fairly rare unless the player is being disingenuous, and a disingenuous player is bad no matter what system you use.Since DW is pure theater of the mind, "out of reach" is a little more complicated. That is, it is a matter of a judgment call for the GM. On the one hand, you absolutely should encourage your players trying to do cool stunts because that's an intended part of playing this game. On the other, simply going for it every single time may not be the best choice for effective challenge and engagement. This is where the Principles provide useful guidance, for example:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Embrace the fantastic." More than just a fancy way of saying the rule of cool, this is an instruction to DW GMs that they should lean into the imagined space and its differences from reality. The players are there to play fantastical adventures they can't have IRL. If swinging from chandeliers and sliding down bannisters is what excites and motivates them, in general the GM should go with it, because genuine player enthusiasm is a precious and irreplaceable commodity.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Draw maps, leave blanks." Dismissing an opportunity to put a character in a spot or jeopardize a plan for relatively minor reasons is wasteful. Do you need to specify exactly where the chandelier is in the room in advance? If not, then just...don't. It's there in the room. If it becomes relevant, cool, the map gets filled in a little more. If it doesn't, cool, no time wasted on something irrelevant. If the players envision something different from what you envisioned, talk it out. Things not actually nailed down in the fiction should remain flexible, both because that is useful for framing an ongoing and engaging story, and because it enables the players to add to that story in ways you just didn't consider in advance. "Hmm, I thought of it as one big chandelier over the middle of the big table. What were you thinking?" etc.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Ask questions and use the answers." It's, frankly, rather dull to answer someone's question about chandeliers by saying that it's simply out of reach and thus impossible. If it makes sense for the chandelier to be difficult to reach, then turn that difficulty into a challenge, perhaps even for a second character: "Aerith, you can see that Bob wants to bring down the chandelier on the enemy's heads, but it's too far for any of you to reach...but you have both your swift arrows and your trusty raven at your side. What do you do?" Suddenly, something being impossible for one person becomes a golden opportunity for another. Obviously, this specific solution does not generalize to all possible parallel situations, but the underlying notion of turning what could be a dead end into an open-ended chance for something to happen (whether by making a risky offer, highlighting another character,  showing the upsides/downsides of their abilities, etc.) is a huge part of what makes DW enjoyable to play and to run.</li> </ul>In rare cases, things simply won't make sense, and it is okay to come to that conclusion after discussion. But, as someone who has been running DW for over five years, and played in it for several years a before that, such instances are very rare. Nearly without exception, players are either already doing something consistent with the fiction, or they realize their mistake quickly and adjust to something that is consistent with the fiction. I have never once had to deal with bad faith behavior from my players and I have never witnessed it as a player myself, but in the event of such a thing, you need to resolve the out of game behavior issue before you can address the concerns within it.Then you remind them that in order for them to do something, the fiction must support it first. Moves must, always, follow from the fiction. This is represented by two maxims:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"You have to do it to do it." That is, for the character to perform an action, they must actually be doing the things required. If you want the equivalent of a Perception check (the ridiculously named "Discern Realities"), then you must be closely examining someone or something. If you want to Hack & Slash, you must physically attack an enemy with a melee weapon. Etc. The fictional state of the world, of the character, must establish that an action is taking place.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"If you do it, you do it." The instant the fiction indicates a move is happening, it happens. You don't get to decide not to roll because you don't feel like Hack & Slash if you (as the trigger phrase says) "attack an enemy in melee." This is not meant to be punitive, it just means that triggers really do set off the move they are meant to set off. (I, of course, give my players an out, of the "is that what you do"/"are you sure" variety, when I am unsure if they are being serious or if it seems like they don't fully understand what it is they are signing up for, so to speak.)</li> </ul>As a result of these two combined, there is a one to one correspondence between fictional triggers and moves: if-and-only-if one, then always the other too. If you're in an open field, there are no chandeliers, no ceilings, no ropes, no balconies, etc.Then your players are playing in bad faith, and it is their responsibility to change that bad behavior. Respecting established fiction is absolutely critical to playing Dungeon World. If they simply cannot be trusted to play reasonably, then it will be impossible for them to play Dungeon World. They are untrustworthy as players, and trust is required for play. I am honestly not sure how you manage to play any system with players you don't trust.I... genuinely have no idea how to respond to this. How have you done this shift? Why? You are playing by the rules, yes, but the authority is still you. You make the judgment calls. In general, DW is set up so that very, very, very few rules should require judgment calls about whether they occur (see above), but depend utterly on the details, the how and why and what. E.g., with partial success on Defy Danger (effectively the "saving throw" but for...all dangerous stuff, it is probably the single most-used move in DW), the GM must offer "a worse outcome, hard bargain, or ugly choice." That you must do so is playing by the rules, but I hope you'll agree that that is an incredibly broad range of options and leaves the GM pretty free to choose exactly how they wish to do it.So...what does "you've shifted the authority to the authors" mean? Because from where I'm sitting the statement sounds like nonsense.Which is exactly, and explicitly, what DW requires.</blockquote>

Verification