Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7336558" data-attributes="member: 82106">This is a good point, EVERY CHECK exists to move the fictional position of the narrative either in the player's favor, or against them. There are ALWAYS stakes. In fact, my game, HoML, literally does not allow checks outside of a challenge situation (basically an SC or combat though there's a bit more nuance to it than that). So there is ALWAYS an established set of stakes, something the players are driving for, and something that will happen if they fail. At the very least when you elect to search for the map a null result would be something like &quot;you waste a lot of time here looking for the map before you find it in the bread box in the nearby kitchen.&quot; That would be a bit of a flat action resolution, but it meets the minimally acceptable criteria of moving the narrative forward into a more or less favorable scenario for the PCs. In other words, really the whole idea that there's some big importance to that level of detail, exactly where the map is hidden doesn't matter in this style of play. The GM might well note where the map is hidden, and then use that information in narration, that's fine. It just isn't critical. If the fictional positioning has to be correct for an action to matter, then there's no reason for a check to take place, &quot;you search the study, there's no map here&quot;. There's neither success nor failure, nothing hinges on a search of the study. Thus if the kitchen is out of scope, then part of the character's goal must be to establish themselves there in order to search. Here's where [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s information point comes in, it makes no sense in this mode of play to have the necessary fictional positioning be unknowable. Either give some hints or just put the map where the PCs actually are, etc. Long guessing games are rarely that much fun.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7336558, member: 82106"] This is a good point, EVERY CHECK exists to move the fictional position of the narrative either in the player's favor, or against them. There are ALWAYS stakes. In fact, my game, HoML, literally does not allow checks outside of a challenge situation (basically an SC or combat though there's a bit more nuance to it than that). So there is ALWAYS an established set of stakes, something the players are driving for, and something that will happen if they fail. At the very least when you elect to search for the map a null result would be something like "you waste a lot of time here looking for the map before you find it in the bread box in the nearby kitchen." That would be a bit of a flat action resolution, but it meets the minimally acceptable criteria of moving the narrative forward into a more or less favorable scenario for the PCs. In other words, really the whole idea that there's some big importance to that level of detail, exactly where the map is hidden doesn't matter in this style of play. The GM might well note where the map is hidden, and then use that information in narration, that's fine. It just isn't critical. If the fictional positioning has to be correct for an action to matter, then there's no reason for a check to take place, "you search the study, there's no map here". There's neither success nor failure, nothing hinges on a search of the study. Thus if the kitchen is out of scope, then part of the character's goal must be to establish themselves there in order to search. Here's where [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s information point comes in, it makes no sense in this mode of play to have the necessary fictional positioning be unknowable. Either give some hints or just put the map where the PCs actually are, etc. Long guessing games are rarely that much fun. [/QUOTE]

Verification