Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Brumal" data-source="post: 9407254" data-attributes="member: 7032348">An idea (or maybe an observation) I have about knowledge skill systems is that groups can choose betweenKnowledge skill checks determine whether some fiction the player contributes is true; OR Knowledge skill use by a player invites their GM to contribute some fiction. Fiction, once made true, persists. Framed in terms of the OP, the options could play out asPlayer says that digging a pit on a game trail is the best way to catch a watzit. GM calls for a knowledge skill check. Success means that as it turns out, in this world watzits are best caught by digging pits. Player says they (as their character) would know how to catch a watzit because they have skill or background X. Negotiation may be required to agree applicability, but let's say they agree that Watzit's are supernatural creatures and those are in scope for skill or background X. A successful check forces GM to contribute some fiction - the best way to catch one is to wait in the watzit tree. (With interesting opportunities around how to handle failed checks e.g. the fiction can turn out to be troublesomely true, dangerously false, or I suppose just false.)GM pre-authoring watzit-catching fiction either rules out the first option (in which case, why not just disclose it?) or remains contingent (i.e. is subject to change until it enters campaign canon via either option.) Where a knowledge skill check is called for to force GM to disclose something they pre-authored, that can be viewed as falling into the second option (does it really matter when GM authors it?)</blockquote>

Verification