I openly disagreed with Lanefan about the game being “the DM’s game”.
As I said when I first jumped into this thread, I was a little hesitant to do so because usually it becomes two camps. But I am very much in the middle on this.
So it’s tough when someone mentally places me on one “side” of the debate and then decides I share the opinion of others on that side, despite not having expressed those opinions.
So, while I understand that sometimes boiling things down to sides can be convenient, it limits nuance.
Few thoughts on this:
1) I'm really not looking to establish "who is in the general consensus of those 7 points", "who agrees with a few, who disagrees with others", "who actually agrees with all 9 points." The only reason that this became an issue at all is because it somehow became contentious while the same few users who were declaring it contentious were actually agreeing with it in their other posts (and one was challenging my integrity in even outlining "the worldbuilding ethos" - which again, was almost entirely aggregation and not extrapolation on my end - in the course of that odd exchange)!
But none of that is interesting. Its obfuscatory and derails interesting conversation about the discussed subjects. You can have two people agree with the Anthropgenic Global Warming Hypothesis (say agreement on radiative heat transfer and forcing related to the properties of carbon molecules, and general agreement on positive feedbacks) while they disagree on finer points of the hypothesis (such as net albedo and the total dynamics of ocean heat uptake/transfer). But bogging down conversation with THERE IS NO CONSENSUS detracts from fine analysis on the dynamics/fundamentals of the system is neither helpful nor interesting. It just gives us biographical facts about various users (which isn't very interesting in a technical discussion).
I mean, @
pemerton and I definitely have some nuanced disagreements on our play (he mentioned The Czege Principle above) such as the viability of proliferate player-authored kickers (scene-openers/framing) in the course of play. And that is fine. But we have never bothered to dispute our overlap and general consensus on GMing (even when its come up in conversations on these boards with folks "putting us into the same broad box"). It just doesn't matter that we don't agree completely on The Czege Principle or certain versions of Success With Complications. Maybe if we started a thread to focus precisely on those nuanced disagreements it might...but I suspect the involved users and total interest would be sparse on these boards (therefore we don't), whereas something like "Fail Forward" or "how setting generation impacts play (this thread)" would get a lot more action.
2) With that out of the way, how about something interesting to talk about! @
chaochou and @
Lanefan had an exchange about either a play excerpt or a hypothetical one above. It involved questions of:
(a) setting generation
(b) initial situation generation and related framing
(c) offscreen-part moving/move-making by the GM
(d) information (or lacktherof) and player decision-points/action declarations
(e) the evolution of the gamestate from the initial state to subsequent states.
Now this is extremely relevant to this conversation, so I took that play excerpt (or hypothetical one) and rendered it into a Dungeon World format to contrast the differences with respect to a-e above. Do you have any thoughts on this? I'll grab both and sblock them below:
[sblock]
Quote Originally Posted by Lanefan View Post
Let me try an example.
There's skullduggery going on all over the city. The place is rife with rumours and plots and spies and gossip, and into all this prance the innocent naive low-level PCs looking to spend the spoils of their first real adventure. They take a room at an inn, and go out for a night on the town. At some point things go a bit sideways - there's some yelling and pushing and screaming and the party mage ends up having to discreetly charm a local harlot in order to calm the situation down; the charm works, well, like a charm. The mage now has a new friend, adventurers-plus-new-friend go about their merry evening, and a good time is had by all. The adventurers, including the mage, pass out around sunrise whereupon the harlot wanders off.
Player side: mage charms harlot who at his invitation joins mage and friends for a night of partying before slipping away a bit after sunrise. String pulled, result obtained.
DM side: harlot is actually an agent (who, depending on developments, the party may or may not have met later in this capacity) working for the local Duke. She realized the yelling and pushing was a distraction intended to mask something else, and joined the fray in order to get herself into the scene so she could try to determine what was being masked by the distraction. She managed to notice two men sneaking into an alley that she knew led to a hidden access to the Duke's manor house, just before being charmed by the mage and taken along for a night of revels. She didn't report this - in fact, she failed to report at all - and thus the two sneaks get where they're going and none the wiser. Meanwhile other agents who really can't be spared are sent out to search for the missing one, who none too sober comes in on her own not long after sunrise. String pulled, dominoes fall.
Ramifications: next morning word gets out of an attempt on the Duke's life during the night by two unknown men.
I really don't understand what such a DM needs players for. They may as well DM for themselves.
What this reveals, probably inadvertently, is completely self-indulgent GMing. It's purely for the GMs entertainment. You admit the PCs know nothing about what's happening. And will probably never know. And if they do 'find out' all they are ever, ever going to 'find out' is what the GM had pre-decided had happened. I get more agency reading a book.
And then you add in a new layer of GM force. The mage may get arrested for treason. And if he does the players get the joys of unravelling the GMs smugly convoluted plot to clear his name.
Was this supposed to be an example of 'player agency'? Is this the GM in 'full on react mode'? I'm genuinely confused by what this example is supposed to demonstrate. But what it actually reveals is quite telling - players as powerless stooges and pawns being exploited to help spice up a GMs solo game.
So lets re-iterate this play excerpt using Dungeon World and the difference should be noticeable.
There's skullduggery going on all over the city. The place is rife with rumours and plots and spies and gossip, and into all this prance the innocent naive low-level PCs looking to spend the spoils of their first real adventure.
Ok, this might be a setup for a DW game with 3 PCs; Dashing Hero (A Lover in Every Port, Daring Devil, Plan of Action), Barbarian (Mortal Pleasures and Fame and Glory appetites), Wizard (Mystical Puppet Strings, Charm Person spell).
Skulduggery City wouldn't be a place that the GM fleshed out stem to stern before play. This may be a place that was put on the map by a player prior to play and the only bit that we know about it (and have written out) is that its a den of scoundrels from the government, to the nobles, to the watch, to the clergy, to the layfolk. That, coupled with the PC build flags is plenty to work with to come up with interesting, dangerous situations on the spot and let things snowball from there.
They take a room at an inn, and go out for a night on the town. At some point things go a bit sideways - there's some yelling and pushing and screaming
So they've entered the town. That triggers the Dashing Hero's move:
A Lover In Every Port (CHA) When you enter a town that you’ve been to before (your call), roll +CHA. On a 10+, there’s an old flame of yours who is willing to assist you somehow. On a 7-9, they’re willing to help you, for a price. On a miss, your romantic misadventures make life more complicated for the party.
Looks like a 6- and the harlot is the romantic misadventure. I would make up some story about a hooker without a heart of gold in this city to reveal an unwelcome truth. I may ask the player to fill in the blanks about what went wrong or I may make something up myself. So my current complication is the only chance they have to avoid her wrath is by sticking to this real den of horrors ward of the city. She's so well-connected that she'll hear he is in town, but she might steer clear of that place (but, of course, it amps up the danger).
Alright, so it sounds like they have Coin to spend (on hirelings/henchman, lodgings, finery, gear, prestige). So if they do indeed go to the den of horrors ward, then I make up an appropriate inn and clientele for that setting, give it an appropriate name (maybe Rock Bottom), an appropriate staff and layabouts/rabblerousers/troublemakers. The players pay their Coin and are making the Recover move and the Carouse move:
Recover
When you do nothing but rest in comfort and safety after a day of rest you recover all your HP. After three days of rest you remove one debility of your choice. If you’re under the care of a healer (magical or otherwise) you heal a debility for every two days of rest instead.
Carouse
When you return triumphant and throw a big party, spend 100 coins and roll +1 for every extra 100 coins spent. ✴On a 10+, choose 3. ✴On a 7–9, choose 1. ✴On a miss, you still choose one, but things get really out of hand (the GM will say how).
You befriend a useful NPC.
You hear rumors of an opportunity.
You gain useful information.
You are not entangled, ensorcelled, or tricked.
You can only carouse when you return triumphant. That’s what draws the crowd of revelers to surround adventurers as they celebrate their latest haul. If you don’t proclaim your success or your failure, then who would want to party with you anyway?
Sounds like a 6- on Carouse!. Players mark xp, they get one thing they want and then I make things get out of hand.
and the party mage ends up having to discreetly charm a local harlot in order to calm the situation down; the charm works, well, like a charm. The mage now has a new friend, adventurers-plus-new-friend go about their merry evening, and a good time is had by all. The adventurers, including the mage, pass out around sunrise whereupon the harlot wanders off.
Player side: mage charms harlot who at his invitation joins mage and friends for a night of partying before slipping away a bit after sunrise. String pulled, result obtained.
DM side: harlot is actually an agent (who, depending on developments, the party may or may not have met later in this capacity) working for the local Duke. She realized the yelling and pushing was a distraction intended to mask something else, and joined the fray in order to get herself into the scene so she could try to determine what was being masked by the distraction. She managed to notice two men sneaking into an alley that she knew led to a hidden access to the Duke's manor house, just before being charmed by the mage and taken along for a night of revels. She didn't report this - in fact, she failed to report at all - and thus the two sneaks get where they're going and none the wiser. Meanwhile other agents who really can't be spared are sent out to search for the missing one, who none too sober comes in on her own not long after sunrise. String pulled, dominoes fall.
Ramifications: next morning word gets out of an attempt on the Duke's life during the night by two unknown men.
This doesn't tell me much of anything about what may have happened in terms of how the content was introduced/procedurally generated. From the above, it looks like a lot of GM Force and offscreen piece-moving that in no way interacted with player knowledge or reasonably informed decision-points.
Here is something of consequence. If the players picked "you are not entangled, ensorcelled, or tricked" I would be breaking the rules to have this harlot be a double agent. So clearly, they didn't choose that in this situation. Lets say they chose to "gain useful information." Perhaps that useful generation was about a secret entrance in the alley to the Duke's manor house. Now this Duke must have been a relevant feature of play beforehand for this to be "useful information" for the players. Perhaps this Duke's manor house actually has his distillery where he makes spirits of which the formula was stolen from the Barbarian's people. And its time for some revenge!
So they get their info, but I get to introduce a major complication with a Hard move (given the 6-). So as the evening picks up, of course in comes the harlot with a temper a mile wide and a band of ruffians to beat the tar out of the Dashing Hero PC. Everyone is excited about the prospect of a fight (heck, maybe some rabblerousers fall in line behind her crew!) and its mayhem.
Looks like its time for our Wizard to make use of their Mystical Puppet Strings (folks charmed don't recall what you had them do and bear you no ill will) and Charm Person spell:
Cast a Spell (Int)
When you release a spell you’ve prepared, roll+Int.
✴ On a 10+, the spell is successfully cast and you do not forget the spell—you may cast it again later.
✴ On a 7-9, the spell is cast, but choose one:
You draw unwelcome attention or put yourself in a spot. The GM will tell you how.
The spell disturbs the fabric of reality as it is cast—take -1 ongoing to cast a spell until the next time you Prepare Spells.
After it is cast, the spell is forgotten. You cannot cast the spell again until you prepare spells.
Note that maintaining spells with ongoing effects will sometimes cause a penalty to your roll to cast a spell.
So obviously a 7-9 and the player chose to draw unwelcome attention or put themselves in a spot.
So now I go with the double agent complication. Right before she gets charmed, she nods to a pair of shadowy figures at the door who quickly slip away into the night. This would be conveyed to the PCs. It would also be conveyed that they have a good headstart and there is a boisterous crowd that is just getting quelled (the harlot is quelling them at the Wizards command I guess...maybe she is table dancing or something)...taking the harlot away may turn a potential powderkeg into a blow-up (they would have to Defy Danger Charisma). So I guess they stay put rather than pursue.
So the Barbarian and the Dashing Hero break into the manor house to smash the whiskey and steal back the formula. In the course of it, they get a 6- on a result of some appropriate move and end up leaving some incriminating information at the scene that points directly to them. They only realize it the next morning when something identifying that should be on their person is missing...or torn fine silks that match the Dashing Heroes cape/longcoat (whatever)!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So that is how Dungeon World's play agenda/GMing ethos/action resolution and no real setting prep of any consequence/hidden backstory/offscreen moving parts by fiat can bring this situation to life. You don't have to deploy Force, you don't have to adjudicate action resolution by way of extrapolation of unknowable offscreen/unintroduced content. Stuff can just happen and you can fill in the necessary setting blanks as you go to give the players interesting decision points and thematic complications...and players can have all the necessary control over their archetypal portfolio and their decision-tree and inhabit their character's perspective and push their interests.
And GMs can play to find out what happens.[/sblock]