Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8501028" data-attributes="member: 42582">[USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER]'s example of the druid and the stone reminds me of what [USER=6787503]@Hriston[/USER] and I were discussing upthread, about players declaring "open ended" actions like what do I see? or what do I know that's relevant?The canonical trigger for Discern Realities (DW p 68) is when you closely study a situation or person, and the explanatory gloss reinforces this by beginning "To discern realities you must closely observe your target." And the canonical result of a success is asking either 1 or 3 of the listed questions - this is reinforced by the existence of further moves that expand the list of permitted questions. Finally, acting on an answer grants +1 forward, which means that answers have to be the sorts of things that might be bases for acting upon.I think these features of Discern Realities as a move are intended to push against the sort of thing that Hriston and I discussed, and to push towards "focused"/"particularised" knoweldge-acquisition action declarations.In clearstream's example as posted, it's not clear to me exactly what situation was being studied (it seems clear that it was not a person being studied), nor exactly what question was asked and answered given the 8 result, nor what would constitute the druid acting on that answer so as to enjoy a +1 forward. Without that sort of clarity I can't really form a view as to how this little episode illustrates Dungeon World play, and the way "story" - in the form of fronts, dooms, etc - was or wasn't an input into that play.That said, my tentative feeling is that, were I involved in that game and especially were I GMing it, I would not have called for a roll because I don't think the Druid trying to intuit what is not in its right place in itself triggers a player-side move (it dos not trigger Discern Realities, nor on its own does it seem to trigger Communion of Whispers). Nor is it a golden opportunity. So the appropriate GM response would seem to be a soft move - finding an ominous stone might serve that purpose, as a sign of an approaching threat and/or as a revelation of an unwelcome truth, although my own inclination would be to a bit more precise about the threat or unwelcome truth.I can see why [USER=16814]@Ovinomancer[/USER] describes the ominous stone as "untethered". To me, and again just going on what has been described, it seems a bit unparticularised either as an answer to a Discern Realities question or as a soft move made in response to a player action declaration that does not trigger a player-side move.[USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER], I hope the above does not seem too much of an attack. It is always tricky commenting on someone else's play on the basis of a fairly brief description. I am trying to give a sincere response that ties back to some of the other lines of discussion in this thread.</blockquote>

Verification