Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="thefutilist" data-source="post: 9519112" data-attributes="member: 7044566">I was thinking of Type A as having causal effects not related to character action but I'm conflating a load of things.There's the trigger. When we roll.Whether the roll is determining the effect of a characters action or other stuff, or both.How much the consequences are pre-established, and what consequences are pre-established.Ramble about triggers:In BW as I understand it. On a success all we know is that you get your intent. On a failure the GM can not give you your intent or they can give you your intent + complications.In HQ, I think you either get your intent or not dependant on the dice.In game terms, when I've played HQ at least. This often means clarifying intent if the GM decides what I'm doing requires a roll. Same with BW.Example: I'm talking to the King and saying how bad it looks if he executes the prisoners. The GM may ask me straight out 'so your trying to shame him into releasing the prisoners?' I say yeah, and we select a suitable skill and roll.You can avoid whiff in both system by just triggering at the end of the first E in the IIEE (apologies to those who hate theory). We don't care if you're eloquent or not, or how well you do at the task, we care about the effect it has on the king.But sometimes when playing those games. I've found that instead the following happens. I state 'I'm trying to persuade the king to release the prisoners.' Then the GM asks me which skill I'm using. We roll and then narrate.Anyway it's a seemingly subtle difference that can have a big impact and it can also confused some people when moving between different systems.HQ and BW care about the intent of the character.D&D cares about how well the character executes the action.Sorcerer cares about the effects of the action.yet the resolution in all of them sits in a similar enough space that you can kind of move between them, which isn't the case for Apocalypse World.Anyway thinking it through it I'm less convinced by @clearstreams split. Or rather I think there's something there but it's harder to concisely put my finger on what.</blockquote>

Verification