Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8995172" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Yup, in fact the main impediment to arbitrary granularity in AW-like PbtAs (and I imagine in at least some other narrative/player focused games) is that the specific mechanics will limit you. So, CONCEPTUALLY you could, in DW, say &quot;well there's a dungeon over there, roll Defy Danger to see if you successfully loot it.&quot; (I mean aside from the conversation won't be structured that way). However, you can't really engage the PC's specific moves and 'stuff' very well that way! I guess the GM could then ride the snowball down the slope to specificity like &quot;Oh, you failed the DD check, well, you're 3 hours underground and you just fell in a pit, what now?&quot; It might be interesting to deliberately build a PbtA which was intended to work that way. I'm not sure exactly why you would, but it might make an interesting way to, for example, do a Supers game!</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8995172, member: 82106"] Yup, in fact the main impediment to arbitrary granularity in AW-like PbtAs (and I imagine in at least some other narrative/player focused games) is that the specific mechanics will limit you. So, CONCEPTUALLY you could, in DW, say "well there's a dungeon over there, roll Defy Danger to see if you successfully loot it." (I mean aside from the conversation won't be structured that way). However, you can't really engage the PC's specific moves and 'stuff' very well that way! I guess the GM could then ride the snowball down the slope to specificity like "Oh, you failed the DD check, well, you're 3 hours underground and you just fell in a pit, what now?" It might be interesting to deliberately build a PbtA which was intended to work that way. I'm not sure exactly why you would, but it might make an interesting way to, for example, do a Supers game! [/QUOTE]

Verification