That bolded line appeared in my first post in this thread. Perhaps you misunderstood or misread that first post - it happens. But my argument hasn't changed, nor become more nuanced.I did understand your bolded line as part of your current argument, but that you had previously (or your argument was) less nuanced.
Mistwell is positing that the decision procedure is already in use, and hence can just continue to be applied.
My preference as a hypothetical player would be to resolve the whole "chasing Capt Whiskers" scenario via intent-and-task resolution, as @Tony Vargas (I think?) suggested upthread. Which would make the map issue redundant.I find this statement interesting. I've previously understood you to not like to play heavily GM directed games because you enjoy having a say in the resulting fiction. Yet, here, you claim that you would not be bothered by the GM directing you into an arbitrary decision mechanic just to support the GM's preferred version of the fiction. I find it hard to reconcile these two statements, and I wonder which one I've misinterpreted.
But if I found myself in a game in which the way situations are established is being resolved by tracking tokens on a map and seeing which "scene triggers" they hit then I'm not going to be super-fussed if it turns out that that is determined by application of a standard decision-procedure rather than vaa nuanced player decision-making seeking some optimal set or sequence of situation triggers. This is a reflection of (i) my general lack of interest in and skill at classic Gygaxian "skilled play", and (ii) my general preference for GM control over scene-framing.
By way of contrast, the troll scenario is not about scene-framing at all. It's about action resolution in the context of an established situation.
And also by way of contrast, the intent-and-task resolution of the hunt for the Capt - which as I said would be my own preferred approach, everything else being equal - would convert the overland travel from a series of scene-triggers into action resolution within a particular scene.
And for purposes of full disclosure: if you want to see how I recently ran a map-based scenario, here is a session report of my Traveller game from Sunday. The map itself wan't secret, and the scene-framing was purely GM-driven but (i) having regard to the fiction established by the players' descriptions of what their PCs were doing and (ii) using the system's surprise rules as a constraint on action economy at the opening of a framed scene. I don't think this is how the original author of that scenario, Marc Miller, intended it to be refereed. It worked because, as I explain in my actual play report, I added additional content to the scenario to create an active opposition (ie antagonistic game elements to include in my framing) rather than having it be simply "passive" exploration.