Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6358517" data-attributes="member: 87792">I am very sure that yours don't line up even with themselves. If they can try again with the situation unchanged then there is no consequence to failure.&nbsp; As I mentioned Gygaxian D&amp;D always has the situation changing due to Wandering Monster Rolls making it a timed game.&nbsp; I explicitly mentioned a number of other games where every roll has a consequence and where the stakes can never be nothing.I've seen it happen four or five times in a row - and frequently all the PCs rolling until someone passes.That's because nowhere does fail forward say that you must transform each failure into a success with consequences.&nbsp; It says that each failure must make the situation worse - and one of the ways to do this is a success with consequences.&nbsp; If someone fails a jump check to longjump over a pit, having them land unpleasantly in the bottom of the pit is failing forward.&nbsp; Because it's a failure that moves things forward by changing the in game situation.&nbsp; But it's certainly a fail.&nbsp; If someone tries to bluff that they are the prince and fails their bluff check so someone calls &quot;Arrest this impostor&quot; to the guards (who start to do so), that's failing forward.&nbsp; It's also failing.&nbsp; Fail Forward therefore demonstrably does not transform &quot;each failure into a success with consequences&quot;.&nbsp; It does transform a small subset of failures into technical successes that make the situation worse.&nbsp; Like the lockpicking example.&nbsp; But if it's only a small subset that get transformed (as it is) your entire argument about slapstick comedy vanishes in a puff of smoke.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 6358517, member: 87792"] I am [I]very[/I] sure that yours don't line up even with themselves. If they can try again [I]with the situation unchanged[/I] then there [I]is[/I] no consequence to failure. As I mentioned Gygaxian D&D always has the situation changing due to Wandering Monster Rolls making it a timed game. I explicitly mentioned a number of other games where every roll has a consequence and where the stakes can never be nothing. I've seen it happen four or five times in a row - and frequently all the PCs rolling until someone passes. That's because nowhere does fail forward say that you must transform each failure into a success with consequences. It says that each failure must make the situation worse - and one of the ways to do this is a success with consequences. If someone fails a jump check to longjump over a pit, having them land unpleasantly in the bottom of the pit is failing forward. Because it's a failure that moves things forward by changing the in game situation. But it's certainly a fail. If someone tries to bluff that they are the prince and fails their bluff check so someone calls "Arrest this impostor" to the guards (who start to do so), that's failing forward. It's also failing. Fail Forward therefore demonstrably does [I]not[/I] transform "each failure into a success with consequences". It does transform a small subset of failures into technical successes that make the situation worse. Like the lockpicking example. But if it's only a small subset that get transformed (as it is) your entire argument about slapstick comedy vanishes in a puff of smoke. [/QUOTE]

Verification