Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9000446" data-attributes="member: 6790260">That is...a difficult question to answer.On the one hand, properly playing by the rules, the answer should be "no." At the highest levels, the Agendas conflict with making moves that are "too hard." Here is the text regarding the second Agenda, all emphasis in original:It is hard to square "honestly portray the repercussions of that action" with making moves that are genuinely inappropriate.Further, there are multiple Principles that should curtail such things. For example:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Embrace the fantastic</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Make a move that follows</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Be a fan of the characters</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Begin and end with the fiction</li> </ul>The first is the weakest for this purpose, but still serves: going "too hard" will likely mean making the game less fantastical. The second is very strong, however. Each move needs to reasonably follow from the fiction, that is, the current situation affecting the character(s.) The text describes this as: "When you make a move what you’re actually doing is taking an element of the fiction and bringing it to bear against the characters. Your move should always follow from the fiction. They help you focus on one aspect of the current situation and do something interesting with it. What’s going on? What move makes sense here?"Being a fan of the characters is also quite strong. Note, however, that it doesn't mean "give the characters everything they want." A fan, in this structure, is someone watching a TV show or reading a book. If the characters instantly win everything forever, the story would be boring, and probably pretty bad. But if they just suffer forever with nothing good, that would also be obviously bad storytelling. "Be a fan" means you want to see them face challenges and overcome them, to wrestle with difficult decisions, to grow and change in response to adversity. A "too hard" move would be one that denies the opportunity to do so.Beginning and ending with the fiction is critical. Moves only exist because some parts of the fiction have uncertainties or ambiguities that need to be resolved. When I'm using my moves well, they blend invisibly into just...telling a story. They just give me clear, useful structures for how to do that.Finally, there's one bit of instruction that is very useful here, especially in light of how it tends to be discussed, but I need to explain the difference between "Soft" and "Hard" moves first. A soft move is the threat of something. An opponent knocking an arrow, a cultist lunging forward with a dagger, a boulder rolling down from the cliff above, a fire creeping toward the bookcase, etc., etc., etc. Anything that indicates a problem will happen, but hasn't happened yet, is a soft move. A hard move is a threat that actually manifests. The arrow strikes, the dagger cuts deep, the boulder falls on you or someone/something important, the books flash fire, what-have-you. As a general rule, GM moves are soft moves to begin with. Hard moves are triggered in one of three ways: either because a player ignored a previous soft move (and thus the threat becomes fact), or because a player rolled poorly on a move (often, Defy Danger, since its whole purpose is to respond to a threat!)For the latter case, the hard move that results from the poor roll are conditioned by whatever move it was. With Defy Danger, the danger isn't defied, it happens. With Discern Realities, I usually prefer to Reveal an Unwelcome Truth, another GM move, but I could also do several others depending on context. E.g., the classic "split the party because someone accidentally activated a secret door and got whisked away" trick (where "Separate Them" is another GM move.) This is, more or less, just the "Make a move that follows" and "Begin and end with the fiction" Principles in action.The former case is the most relevant here, though, because it is the one where the player's decisions are the factor that triggers a hard move. Specifically, the text speaks of "When the players give you a golden opportunity," and clarifies that an ignored soft move is a golden opportunity for a hard move. However, almost everyone discussing this (and this has always been my policy as well) takes pains to ensure that ignoring the soft move is what the player intended to do. I don't ask it constantly, but if the players are doing something that I don't think they would want to do if they fully understood the situation, I give them a chance to reconsider: typically, "Are you sure?" but sometimes "Do you actually say/do that?" or "Is that what you want to do?" Sometimes it will be a restatement, e.g., "Just so we're clear, the bookcase will catch on fire if you don't stop it."I believe there's only been one or two times in the past five years where the players and I were just genuinely talking past each other. However many times it was, I have always been willing to go back and address the problem to set things right. I absolutely refuse to be the kind of GM that dicks over his players over persnickety BS or a genuine misunderstanding. If a miscommunication has occurred, I presume it is my fault unless good evidence suggests otherwise. This makes it almost impossible to make a move that is "too hard."</blockquote>

Verification