Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8862465" data-attributes="member: 42582">I can't comment on BitD/FitD, but Apocalypse World doesn't boil down to &quot;yes, and&quot;. For instance, if my character goes aggro against a NPC, and then my overall result is 6 or less, the GM can make as hard a move as they like that follows from the fiction, which might be that my PC is captured, or is left beaten to a bloody pulp on the floor, or whatever else seems to make sense.Part of what makes AW work is that it generates momentum in the fiction without the need for collaboration on the story between the players and the GM. This is the essence of the sort of RPG that the Forge used to call &quot;story now&quot;.I think [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER] is right to say that introducing this into D&amp;D would require a focus on intent in action declaration, and hence adjudication of success and failure. It is the protagonists getting what they want, or missing out on it, that generates the ebb and flow of a story.In a lot of D&amp;D play, including (as best I can tell) a lot of 5e D&amp;D play, it is the GM who makes key decisions about what the protagonists want, and what the significance of any situation, or any action declaration, is. Changing that can be quite tricky, because it tends to require a different sort of approach to prep, to framing and to adjudication from that which is set out in the 5e materials (at least as I'm familiar with them).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8862465, member: 42582"] I can't comment on BitD/FitD, but Apocalypse World doesn't boil down to "yes, and". For instance, if my character goes aggro against a NPC, and then my overall result is 6 or less, the GM can make as hard a move as they like that follows from the fiction, which might be that my PC is captured, or is left beaten to a bloody pulp on the floor, or whatever else seems to make sense. Part of what makes AW work is that it generates momentum in the fiction without the need for collaboration on the story between the players and the GM. This is the essence of the sort of RPG that the Forge used to call "story now". I think [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER] is right to say that introducing this into D&D would require a focus on [i]intent[/i] in action declaration, and hence adjudication of success and failure. It is the protagonists getting what they want, or missing out on it, that generates the ebb and flow of a story. In a lot of D&D play, including (as best I can tell) a lot of 5e D&D play, it is the GM who makes key decisions about what the protagonists want, and what the significance of any situation, or any action declaration, is. Changing that can be quite tricky, because it tends to require a different sort of approach to prep, to framing and to adjudication from that which is set out in the 5e materials (at least as I'm familiar with them). [/QUOTE]

Verification