Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 8663450" data-attributes="member: 7026594">I can't quite go that far about characters.But I think it's entirely true of our story.  And while I always want to respect player agency with their characters, that means respecting their decisions, not always making the outcomes of those decisions what they were hoping for.I'm fine with according the player full ownership of their character, but it's not in an authorial sense.  They don't get to dictate every win or loss. They don't get to decide everything good or bad that happens to the character. The way I prefer to play there generally isn't a story laid out ahead of time.  The GM sets up situations, sites and relationships, the players make characters and decisions, and we find out what the story is after the fact.One thing that seems neat to me about PbtA rules is that who's deciding some stuff seems a little more transparent.  Someone earlier in the thread (IIRC) talked about PbtA doing conflict resolution whereas D&D mostly does task resolution.  So if the PC makes his Check in D&D, we know he succeeded at the task, but it's pretty much always up to the DM's judgement whether and when the conflict is resolved.  Whereas if the PC is making a Move in AW, the check generally resolves the conflict, and whether he succeeded or failed actually binds the GM in terms of limiting what kind of consequences ensue.</blockquote>