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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8307966" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, given that there are, as you say, infinite potential variables in an RPG (lets not debate whether this is a universal truth about RPGs or not) then what purpose do the choices of framing by the GM in a game similar to DW really accomplish then? Lets look to the obvious place, which is the stated agenda of the game! Now, that will differ from game to game, so we cannot really make generalized statements about it, except to say that presumably good GMing serves that agenda, and bad GMing does not. There may also be other criteria we want to measure as well. So, I don't care about infinities in that sense. When I talk about infinities, I think what I'm talking about is how infinite amounts of indeterminate implicit state of the game world undermines any possible attempt to generate arguments about what "logically would happen next." Take the 'bribe the guard' scenario. There is literally no way for a player to know what might come about if he approaches a guard and tries to bribe him. Maybe the GM has some notes which amount to stating a result of such an attempt (presumably it is foreseeable). Maybe it is just stated in terms of probabilities, modulated by some character trait or varying depending on easily classified game state such as the PC's approach, his race, social class, appearance, size of bribe, etc. This is fine, but it also may be that all this is sort of eyeballed on the fly. That's OK too, but the player really cannot judge, except by simply querying the GM's imagined world state. If he is going to simply work from what is likely to succeed he will soon run into problems. Maybe his PC is a dwarf and all the guards hate dwarves, how would anyone know? Even the GM may not know, so how are tactics even possible here?This is all why I have long favored approaches similar to DW. You have stated explicit agenda and derived principles, coupled with a system which generates story outcomes based on that, or at least suggests to the GM when and how elements might be introduced to the game and mechanisms for doing so, pacing, etc. Clear agenda, everyone knows what game they are playing, and clear process which supports that agenda. Sure, there are 'infinities' and plenty of GM 'fiat' in DW. But like the example [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] posted that you paraphrased above, the GM is simply applying his process there. The Wizard rolls a failure/consequence, and he puts stress on the situation by having a complication, the wand shoots out of her hand. Now she goes after it. The player here articulates an in-fiction tactical reason for that move, but it also serves the game by upping the ante. All her cards are now on the table, character death is plainly being wagered at this point. It is consistently in-character also, which is another requirement besides plot-wise fictional consistency. This ticks all the boxes of DW.</blockquote>

Verification