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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8501037" data-attributes="member: 16814">Yes.  This isn't a soft move, it's just introduction of fiction.  A soft move says "this is a problem" and requires a "what do you do about it?"  It's a mistake to think that the complication here is just a vague possibility of badness somewhere down the line.At best it fits into 1), but the abandonment of the other facets (it provides no adventure and it's not playing to find out what happens) is obvious.  You don't "suit the agenda" by doing only a part of it and ignoring the other parts.Look, if the fiction demands a move, then it's your job, under the agenda and principles of play, to follow the rules and do that.  And this means that if you call for a DR move, then you need to be ready to have the game go off at this exact point.  That you have a requirement to make a move on a 7-9 (usually a soft move) means that you need to make a move.  Introducing a stone that might reference a favored bit of out-of-game fiction and may be a bad thing some distant time down the road is NOT showing signs of a future threat.  That move is like finding wyvern tracks on the ground -- if you don't do something PDQ about that, then wyverns are going to swoop down on you!  The point of play here isn't that some plot point for the future is introduced (the Fronts are about as close as you should be getting to this, and those should be pretty open) but rather that it creates play RIGHT NOW.  Finding a mysterious stone should have immediately required the Druid do something else to deal with whatever threat this stone represents.  And that's because you called for a move from the player, and that game demands that you follow the agenda and principles and rules for that move (and your moves).  What you've described here is pretty typical Trad play.  You've taken what DW says, filtered it through what you wanted to do rather than what it's telling you to do, and assumed that you've got the measure of the system.  I don't doubt your game is great fun for you and your players, but it's not how DW is intended or described as running.I don't really care if you play DW this way, mind.  It's your table and you should be prioritizing that.  Drifting or wholesale hacking games to do what your table wants is just fine, and I 100% support it.  However, drifting a game like this and then trying to claim you're playing it straight is a place that I'll challenge you.  Play it how you want, but don't claim it's the straight game.  I say this to 5e players as well, when they have houserules that have altered the game in significant ways.  I have, very much.  They're intended not to run counter to the agenda and principles of play, but work with them.  Fronts should be created with the PCs and their goals/needs/beliefs/etc in mind to provide honest antagonism to the PCs, not as the GM's idea of a cool story.  Fronts should be open and obvious to the players, with it being obvious they're in play as consequences to play.  Fronts should only advance according to what happens in play -- both with what portents and dooms are inserted and when they're used.  You can prep Fronts, absolutely, but like all prep this should be at most an aid to play, not a truth that exists but is yet to be revealed.  Nothing in a Front's prep is true until it enters play, and it should only be entering play when the play demands it.</blockquote>

Verification