NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8646685" data-attributes="member: 42582">What is supposed to follow from this?The key point [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] is making is that the outcome of the mechanical component of the resolution procedure - which is the player failing their Resources check - demands a certain response from the GM (either twist or condition), and that the previous sequence of twists and conditions strongly suggests (without quite demanding) that on this occasion it be a twist, and that the twist has to be the introduction of a new obstacle, and (as [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER] posted) that new obstacle should make sense in light of established fiction, Beliefs, Creeds, established relationships, etc. (This is the closest analogue, in BW or TB, to the soft/hard move dynamic of AW.)The variety of fiction that will satisfy those constraints is - at least for practical purposes - unlimited, but that doesn't mean that there are no constraints, or that the constraints don't matter. One of the most important ones is - the PC doesn't get the thing they were hoping to purchase. Whereas in a task resolution framework - as Vincent Baker points out - the GM is free, in response to the failed check, to have the desired oil turn up in some other fashion. In that approach, the relationship between failing the check and obtaining the supplies is not dictated by the mechanical component of the resolution procedure, but is determined entirely by the GM. This is why, as per John Harper's diagrams posted by [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER], only GM decision making will resolve a situation, and why the GM is the "glue" that joins everything together.This is confused. In John Harper's diagram, the GM doesn't choose fiat. The game rules and procedures demand fiat, because they don't resolve the situation in any other, GM-independent, fashion.How, in your 5e D&D play, do you resolve situations? How do you determine (for instance) whether or not the PC who wins the fight makes it to the ship in time? Whether or not the player who turns out not to have enough cash or credit to buy oil nevertheless finds an unattended amphora of oil on the very next streetcorner? Whether or not cracking the safe will find the dirt on the villain?As presented in its rulebooks, the answer 5e offers to all those questions is that the GM makes a decision. It's crystal clear in the example of play found in the Basic PDF that I posted not far upthread.I agree with [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER] that this all seems self-evident. I don't know what it is supposed to be telling us about the differences between RPGs, the relationships between techniques and agendas, etc.</blockquote>

Verification