Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9232231" data-attributes="member: 42582">I took [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER] to be saying something else:This is not the non-use of resolution mechanics. This is the non-framing of an action declaration.As I also said to [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER], to me this does not seem to me to be the sort of play DitV aims at. And I continue to take the view that, in DitV, if the players are having their PCs look for information in a place that the GM's prep specifies it cannot be found, something has gone wrong: the GM has failed to actively reveal the town in play."If nothing’s at stake, say yes to the players, whatever they’re doing. . . . If they ask for information, give it to them." (p 139). If the GM is adhering to this principle, the players won't come to have a false belief about where the documents are located.Suppose the GM has a NPC lie - as per p 140, That’s okay! I have the NPC lie. You’ve watched movies. You always can tell when you’re watching a movie who’s lying and who’s telling the truth. And wouldn’t you know it, most the time the players are looking at me with skeptical looks, and I give them a little sly nod that yep, she’s lying.So the players won't have their PCs look in the safe, with the players hoping to find the dirt. Perhaps they open the safe to prove a point that the documents aren't in there. Maybe we even collectively narrate a colour scene, in which the PCs confirm their suspicion that they have been lied to, by checking the safe. (And maybe this is the sort of thing @AbdulAlhzared had in mind.) What we don't have is a situation in which the players believe something is at stake - that the documents might be in the safe - when in fact it's not.And there's a reason for this, within the context of DitV as a RPG: it's not a game about finding stuff out. It's a game about responding, judging, and imposing one's will on a conflicted social, emotional and spiritual situation.</blockquote>

Verification