NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 7074795" data-attributes="member: 6696971">The nature and breadth of "GM purview" in 4e (a part of GM Agency) is different than in the D&D you're used to.  See some of my posts above to folks for more insight into this.  DW, taken holistically, puts a lot of constraints (good constraints - they ensure System Agency, maximize Player Agency, alleviate both macro cognitive workload and micro mental overhead for the GM, and work to both facilitate integrity of the fiction and genre coherency) on content introduction.Furthermore, Ask questions and use the answers is a VERY fundamental part of GMing in DW.  This happens not only at the outset of the game, but all throughout play.  Just a quick for instance of why this game was about "aliens" is in the player of Saerie's character giving me (a) how she wanted her formative conflict (which take place in the past - we play this out) that hooks her into the fiction to open and (b) a fundamental setting element that ties into her backstory:We play this out.  She fleshes out her Alignment/Bonds/relationships/place in the world using the results and this propels us into the current fiction.The creation and nature of Earthmaw is an example of "in-play" Ask questions and use the answers when the player of Otthor achieved a 10+ on a Spout Lore move (supplemented by the expenditure of a Bag of Books - secured from the records of the ruined settlement of World's End Bluff).So then, sum told, "going rogue" and introducing whatever-the-hell fiction I want to in DW is "not a thing".Gotcha.  Certainly no dispute here.See here is where you will find dispute with me.  "Tension and drama", all of frequency, potency, inherent dynamism, and breadth of prospects) and can absolutely by systemitized.  When I say systemitized I mean both in the machinery (System Agency), in the GMing techniques to be deployed and principled to be followed (GM Agency), and in the players ability to either introduce content/conflict or in their ability to respond to it (Player Agency).  Just consider what I've brought up in this thread over and over:1)  Dungeon World's lifeblood of 2/3 of aggregate move results being that of the spiraling/snowballing "Success with..." variety.  Just moving that down from 2/3 of the results to 1/3 results will significantly affect the systemitized "tension and drama" of the play experience.2)  Consider B/X's lifeblood of Exloration/Rest Turns meets Wandering Monster Clock and Reactions/Morale.  Change the maths on those (so adventurous/dangerous stuff happens much less often) and constrain the potential prospects for outcomes (the dynamism) and you will significantly affect the systemitized "tension and drama" of the play experience.I understand what you mean here.  The problem is the whole "contact with the players" part.  The more Player Agency and System Agency a game has, the more difficult it is to be able to create a preemptive flow chart or story tree (even with wildly deviating branches).  Furthermore, if you don't have to do it...I mean, if things just flat out work with you having to put that effort in (and you get to "play to find out what happens" as a bonus), why would you put the time in to try to do so?</blockquote>

Verification