Just to see if I understand this, let me paint two examples, one using AW and one using 5E. The scene framing is the same, a thief-type character moving down a passage.
Once the framing is done, does it matter how it is done?
I'm not
@chaochou, but will respond to this question. The answer is Yes.
For instance, suppose that the AW MC/GM decides, in response to a failure, to "announce future badness".
What does "future badness" mean? It means "something that, were it to come to pass, would be adverse to the interests of the character as played by the player". In a context where the GM chose the framing as part of their control of the direction of the fiction, how can they announce future badness? This can only be done if it is accepted that the trajectory of the fiction is shaped by the players and their concerns.
The normative language and orientation found in "announce future badness" is replete in AW's GM-side moves: announce offscreen badness; put someone in a spot; offer an opportunity (with or without a cost); turn their move back on them; separate them; etc.
Opportunity,
cost,
turning something back on someone,
being put in a spot: these all presuppose a disposition or orientation of the character, things they want and things they don't want.
Separate them does not do so at the linguistic level - but clearly does so at the operational level, as it is meaningful as a move only if the characters who get separated have an interest in being togehter.
To repeat, in a context of play in which it is the GM's concerns and desires for the fiction that shape the framing, these sorts of moves won't be able to be made.
5E
DM: Roll Perception please.
Player: 6
DM You fall into A 10 foot pit and take 4 damage.
What you are describing here is a framed scene, followed by a call for what is in effect a saving throw, followed by (in AW language) a hard move.
To me, this doesn't seem to be very interesting play - the player has not made any decision in response to anything of interest or value.
AW
GM: There might be traps in a passage like this. (soft)
Player: I am confident in my skills, watching for traps but I keep moving.
GM: You hear the soft fall of sand. (soft)
P: I try to find the source of the sand (roll fails)
GM: You fall into a 10 foot pit with <consequences>. (hard)
This doesn't seem to have anything in particular to do with AW. It actually looks to me like another example of how this might be done in D&D.
In AW, the GM makes moves in two basic circumstances: when everyone looks to them to see what happens next (typically this is a soft move, but if the player hands a golden opportunity then it can be a hard move); and when the resolution of a player-side move tells them to. In that latter case, if the roll is a 6- then the move will typically be a hard move.
So
for some reason we haven't yet specified, the thief-type character is sneaking down a corridor. (Let's say Silas the Skinner is infiltrating an installation at the heart of any enemy hardhold. The floors of the installation are the same sand as the ground outside.)
Silas' player says "I walk down the passage". And then looks to the GM to see what happens next. The GM replies, "You hear the soft fall of sand: the floor is not stable" - this is a soft move, putting Silas in a spot.
Silas's player replies "I'm confident in my skills - I keep going down the passage!" This is Acting Under Fire, and so Silas's player has to roll ("if you do it, you do it" is the principle for player-side moves"). Let's suppose that the roll is 6 or less: the GM announces "You fall into a pit, about 3 metres deep. Take 2 harm." (That's a hard move, inflicting harm.) Silas's player marks the harm, and then says "I climb out", looking at the GM to see what happens next. The GM makes another move - and
nothing happens is not a GM-side move! Silas's player hasn't handed an opportunity on a platter, so the next move will be a soft one.
Here's another version - after the GM announces the falling sand, Silas's player replies "Where's the sound coming from? What's making the sand fall?" This is reading a situation, and if you do it you do it, so Silas's player makes a roll. They're hoping to roll 7+, so that they can ask "Where's my best way in?" and get a truthful answer from the GM. But they fail, and so the GM announces "You fall into a pit, about 3 metres deep. And you're stuck down there." The GM has made a different hard move, turning Silas's move back upon him - instead of finding the way in, Silas is stuck with no way in or out. Silas's player then looks at the GM to see what happens next, and so the GM makes another move - and
nothing happens is not a GM-side move! Maybe the GM decides someone comes to see who has been trapped in the pit; or decides that Silas, as he looks around, notices a hatch in the floor of the pit; or anything else that conforms to the GM's principles and agenda.
