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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8306507" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I mean, when I'm told I have to answer truthfully, I don't really see how there's any way to speak about it that isn't synonymous with "constraining." I'm obliged, compelled, required, etc. to do a thing, by the rules. I voluntarily submit to these rules, sure, but that's still a submission; I'm agreeing to my absolute creative freedom as GM being restricted by something more than merely "best practices."Well, I didn't say they weren't, and am not entirely sure where you got that notion. Just that the rules directly tell me both things I'm not supposed to do (like speaking the names of my GM moves), and things I am supposed to do (like truthfully answering questions or providing information that is explicitly "useful and interesting," etc.) That's a constraint, which rises above the not-quite-rules "best practices" notions like Agendas and Principles.Honestly no idea where you got this notion of "control" from. The only thing "controlling" behavior is the system itself; I'm assuming every participant is engaged purely to have a good time, and makes use of moves because they're interesting, useful, or relevant, not because they're trying to dominate.I guess I just disagree. I see plenty of skill in knowing how to advance the fiction, which is impromptu/improv theater, and further skill in both (a) knowing when the fiction has actually triggered a move, and (b) how to make wisest use of the moves you have. Plenty of moves, for example, give Hold that can be spent when you choose to, or have options to choose from, like Discern Realities with its "choose one(/three) questions from the following five" or Bend Bars, Lift Gates with its "choose two(/three) things from the following four" (and thus don't get the one or two things you didn't get to choose).It's absolutely a VERY different skillset compared to basically any version of D&D (except possibly OD&D when things were still heavily in flux and new rule-systems got added all the time in rather ad-hoc fashion). You're much more an improv performer, and instead of tactical choices you have to make qualitative choices as to which things are worth having vs. forsaking. But that's still totally a set of skills, for exactly the same reason that someone can be skilled at improv theater or skilled at distributing military materiel without having perfect knowledge of the battlefield and enemy's plans. I'm reminded of that quote from Sun Tzu's The Art of War: "If I determine the enemy's disposition of forces while I have no perceptible form, I can concentrate my forces while the enemy is fragmented. The pinnacle of military deployment approaches the formless: if it is formless, then even the deepest spy cannot discern it nor the wise make plans against it." A perfect demonstration of how superlative logistical skill is in fact an AWESOME power for any military leader. A Dungeon World character may not have armies at their command (though some might!), but making sound vs. unsound qualitative judgments about what objectives are worth fulfilling IS a skill, and DW play strongly benefits from it. The two skills--improv acting and sound qualitative judgment--do not always go hand in hand though, which can lead to really fascinating character development no matter which one wins out. Producing a great story, which I completely agree is the goal of DW play, benefits from both elements in different ways, and the non-commensurate nature of these two skills can add some delightful tension.</blockquote>

Verification