AbdulAlhazred
Legend
Well, but in the case of games like DW, or BW, PbtA generally and IIUC FitD games, all explicitly decry this kind of thing explicitly. A GM in a Dungeon World game who frames everything in terms of their 'desired outcome', who even HAS a desired outcome, is NOT 'playing to see what happens' and following the other parts of the process and principles stated in the DW rules VERY explicitly! So I would say they are playing some other game, and thus any argument of this basis that tries to state that DW has force is simply wrong because it isn't talking about DW. I THINK the same is true for Burning Wheel from what I've experienced and been told (I played Mouse Guard many years ago), and likewise for FitD-based games which have very explicit structuring and processes.People who have experience playing and running the game seem to be unable to explain why these things cannot be done. Appeal to authority alone will not suffice, you still need to back it up with something. It is perfectly possible I am wrong, but if that is the case, coherent argument for why that might be has not been made.
Prep the desired outcome, frame situations that are likely to evoke actions that take the play towards the desired outcome, when deploying consequences use ones that take the game towards the desired outcome. It is highly likely that we get to the desired outcome eventually. Why can't this be done?
Also note that the huge branching flowchart with several directions and paths things could take was deemed as a railroad by some. It didn't require one specific predestined path or destination. So if having sever preplanned scenes that might happen and several things that might happen after them is enough to make thing a railroad, then the GM doesn't even need to have one specific preferred outcomes in mind, they can have several and nudge the game towards which seems most feasible, and it still would be railroad.
Yes, in these sorts of games, as a general statement, there are strong inputs for the GM in terms of what details they place in scenes and such. I don't think it is unfair to say that, human nature being what it is, that GMs are likely to have no opinions about where the game is going. It is just that their opinions and ideas should have similar weight to that of the other participants, ideally. If a player declares an action in DW, and it is fictionally appropriate, then the GM isn't in a position to judge it, the dice will do that. When a new scene arises the GM has a specific set of 'moves' which generate that new situation, and those moves MUST on principle follow from what came before, which was largely shaped by what the players declared for their moves, how they answered questions (which the GM is obliged to ask), etc.
Force in a DW, or the other systems I mentioned as a general thing, is in violation of the explicit process of play laid out in the rules. We can certainly criticize individual instances of playing DW for involving 'force', but it isn't a part of the game, it has to be imported in violation of the rules.