Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 9215977" data-attributes="member: 82106">I on the other hand would say that the vast majority of play is ENTIRELY this sort of thing. Some of it is a bit less explicit than 'why is the DC 19?'. In fact most of it is players making assumptions about the fiction and acting on them. MOST of the time the GM either doesn't explicitly see this, or there's this bit of pushing game. I mean, if you play with teens you will see it VERY EXPLICITLY when you get things like &quot;well, actually swords don't work that way...&quot; or something like that. Again, not really the typical form.The point is, in OUR play at least, there's nothing BUT negotiation. A lot of it gets built into indy games because that's the understanding of modern RPG designers, that this is what the rules are ABOUT. So, BitD has a process of negotiating an action roll in which the GM gets to state what position and effect are, but the players can question that, and a lot of things are expected to have certain values, or the player can push back by asking what the GM thinks these values are for different options. PbtA games instead might negotiate which moves, if any, are triggered, or maybe which sort of DD roll is going to be made, etc. Or in either game the players may push back directly on the fiction, much like they can in D&amp;D.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 9215977, member: 82106"] I on the other hand would say that the vast majority of play is ENTIRELY this sort of thing. Some of it is a bit less explicit than 'why is the DC 19?'. In fact most of it is players making assumptions about the fiction and acting on them. MOST of the time the GM either doesn't explicitly see this, or there's this bit of pushing game. I mean, if you play with teens you will see it VERY EXPLICITLY when you get things like "well, actually swords don't work that way..." or something like that. Again, not really the typical form. The point is, in OUR play at least, there's nothing BUT negotiation. A lot of it gets built into indy games because that's the understanding of modern RPG designers, that this is what the rules are ABOUT. So, BitD has a process of negotiating an action roll in which the GM gets to state what position and effect are, but the players can question that, and a lot of things are expected to have certain values, or the player can push back by asking what the GM thinks these values are for different options. PbtA games instead might negotiate which moves, if any, are triggered, or maybe which sort of DD roll is going to be made, etc. Or in either game the players may push back directly on the fiction, much like they can in D&D. [/QUOTE]

Verification