Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9676051" data-attributes="member: 71699">Well, the AW MC has the somewhat similar job of saying when a move is invoked. And in both cases, the mechanics normally work out fine if players make the call. It's only in ambiguous and high-noon situations that it matters (which seems to justify a call to arbitration.)I find it in some ways more noteworthy that PbtA moves give MC things to say, while in D&amp;D that's less circumscribed. And perhaps it was dissatisfactions with the latter even, that led to the former.I agree that heuristic is easier to apply, and it's often observed that the way folk play games where consequences are to be discerned in order to invoke a roll, is that they default into discerning character action instead. The GM maintains an attitude of liability to find consequences after rolling that will meet the bar for meaningful. Text in the BW Codex discusses exactly that IIRC.I'm not saying these things all come out the same. The exact way the procedures are designed, what they look for as inputs and yield as ouputs, their intended use in the game they appear in, incline toward differentiated play. In practice that last -- use as intended -- is particularly important: the function of a tool is contingent upon how a tool-user uses that tool.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9676051, member: 71699"] Well, the AW MC has the somewhat similar job of saying when a move is invoked. And in both cases, the mechanics normally work out fine if players make the call. It's only in ambiguous and high-noon situations that it matters (which seems to justify a call to arbitration.) I find it in some ways more noteworthy that PbtA moves give MC things to say, while in D&D that's less circumscribed. And perhaps it was dissatisfactions with the latter even, that led to the former. I agree that heuristic is easier to apply, and it's often observed that the way folk play games where consequences are to be discerned in order to invoke a roll, is that they default into discerning character action instead. The GM maintains an attitude of liability to find consequences [I]after [/I]rolling that will meet the bar for meaningful. Text in the BW Codex discusses exactly that IIRC. I'm not saying these things all come out the same. The exact way the procedures are designed, what they look for as inputs and yield as ouputs, their intended use in the game they appear in, incline toward differentiated play. In practice that last -- use as intended -- is particularly important: the function of a tool is contingent upon how a tool-user uses that tool. [/QUOTE]

Verification