Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8299384" data-attributes="member: 18">Ahhh Green Knight, yeah that all makes sense in that context and actually that kind of makes me want to play it! Agree completely re: swift conversions etc. ("road to Damascus" and so on).Might not be the ideal example for this discussion because in those cases I'd expect more description for such a big play in other RPGs, but yeah with Green Knight this sounds like what it's all about - so I suppose this also points to different RPGs and different situations perhaps seeming to warrant different levels of description.I think three things that tend to factor into detailed enough are:1) Is this a thing people actually know about? Things like tracking, hacking, arcana, stealth and so on aren't things most people IRL have any real experience of (or even could, in some cases), so you're not likely to get the same kind of in-depth description you might for other things.2) Does the game have extremely detailed systems for this? Generally the more detailed the systems the game has for something, the less that seems to be required for a "detailed enough" action declaration.3) Is it a physical skill, like climbing or swimming? In general these seem to, for no entirely clear reason, get a "free pass" on "detailed enough".This has the defacto result of meaning where something is considered "everyday" and where the game doesn't have a detailed system, DMs often want extreme detail, but where something is unusual or physical, they don't require much at all. In D&D, for example, this hits social skills hard - they're considered everyday, somewhat inaccurately (I suspect very few people who play D&D are actually particularly persuasive or intimidating - and indeed if it is a skill, it implies it isn't "everyday"), and the rules are extremely vague and have almost no guidelines (which is extremely anachronistic and unhelpful, design-wise), so a lot of DMs want extremely detailed description.So I think points to another issue - if a game has strong guidance as to how stuff works, then you're not likely to feel the need to demand particularly in-depth descriptions of stuff. You might contrast the Parley action in Dungeon World with D&D's social skills - with Parley, the requirements and outcomes are well-defined. With Parley you must have leverage. Period. Do not pass go. If you don't have some kind of leverage, you don't roll Parley.It's summed up this way:"When you have leverage on a GM Character and manipulate them, roll+Cha. Leverage is something they need or want.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">On a 10+, they do what you ask if you first promise what they ask of you.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">On a 7–9, they will do what you ask, but need some concrete assurance of your promise, right now."</li> </ul>This covers an a multitude of situations (persuasion, intimidation, etc.), has clear guidelines, and clear outcomes.Thus in DW the only time you'd need a detailed description would be if the leverage was kind of hard to convey/complex/indirect.</blockquote>

Verification