Quote from: Archangel Fascist;674708Use up their resources (you lose one ammunition)

Which is also the miss result that RandallS was looking for.

Quote from: Skywalker;674719Which is also the miss result that RandallS was looking for.

No, its not really the miss result I'm looking for. I want a miss that is just a miss. Misses should not require any "moves" by the GM. To me, that is just silly. When someone misses, I want to go on to the next PC, NPC, or monster for their action. 99 times out of 100, that's all that is going to happen (other than using up ammo, if the attack expended any). If something else needs to happen, I can handle it without trying to figure out which "move" from a list best describes what happens.

Side Note: The whole "moves" thing strikes me as an extra layer of busywork for the GM and players. Instead of just saying what they want to try to do, they have to figure out which "move" it falls under. Even if the players just say what they want to do, the GM is supposed to assign it a move (at least as I read the rules) and then resolve it, instead of just resolving it and not caring what move the action falls under. In the grand scheme of things, of course, this probably doesn't mean anything beyond the obvious, Dungeon World is not the game for me.

Quote from: RandallS;674729No, its not really the miss result I'm looking for. I want a miss that is just a miss. Misses should not require any "moves" by the GM. To me, that is just silly. When someone misses, I want to go on to the next PC, NPC, or monster for their action. 99 times out of 100, that's all that is going to happen (other than using up ammo, if the attack expended any). If something else needs to happen, I can handle it without trying to figure out which "move" from a list best describes what happens.

As a GM, you can choose miss and lose 1 ammo, 99 times out of 100. Obviously the game then moves on.

The use of the word "Move" is just unfamiliar nonclementure for a person to do something now (in this case the GM). As such, you are adding weight from the use of a term where there is none. What is actually going on is the same as before and IME in running DW this aspect of play pretty much becomes invisible very quickly.

That is unless you are advocating that the GM shouldn't be able to do stuff and adjudicate the rules at all, which just seems odd to me as that is a fundamental aspect of RPGing.

Quote from: Skywalker;674735As a GM, you can choose miss and lose 1 ammo, 99 times out of 100. Obviously the game then moves on.

The use of the word "Move" is just unfamiliar nonclementure for a person to do something now (in this case the GM). As such, you are adding weight from the use of a term where there is none. What is actually going on is the same as before and IME in running DW this aspect of play pretty much becomes invisible very quickly.

That is unless you are advocating that the GM shouldn't be able to do stuff and adjudicate the rules at all, which just seems odd to me as that is a fundamental aspect of RPGing.

From a volley 7-9, 1 ammo represents several arrows though.
What struck me as actually being missing in the standard volley scenario is that on a 7-9, you can shoot several arrows and you're guaranteed a hit (rather than a reroll, say).
If the GM can get rid of ammo on a failed roll of 6-, that could represent a player shooting several arrows and missing - but that would mean the low roll is giving the GM control of the character to declare they make several shots. The player might not have picked 'cross off ammo' if they'd rolled a 7 rather than a 6.
(freedom for the GM to adjudicate is fine, controlling the PC - not so much).

Quote from: RandallS;674729No, its not really the miss result I'm looking for. I want a miss that is just a miss. Misses should not require any "moves" by the GM. To me, that is just silly. When someone misses, I want to go on to the next PC, NPC, or monster for their action. 99 times out of 100, that's all that is going to happen (other than using up ammo, if the attack expended any). If something else needs to happen, I can handle it without trying to figure out which "move" from a list best describes what happens.

Emphasis added. In the case of NPC or monster, this is what happens as a result of a miss. One of the possible suggested GM moves (which are meant to be inspirational, not limiting) is to deal damage, or use a monster move. That's a monster turn. The primary way the GM's monsters get turns is through misses and sometimes from the middle "soft success" 7-9 band.

If you move from a player's miss narrating no more than the whiff, end their turn, switch to a monster for its turn and have it attack or do something fitting (use a long paralyzing tongue, breathe fire, disappear, etc.), congrats. That's how DW's RAW for a miss work, or at least one possible way, since your GM moves are very broad. Monster moves are equally so, here's some: Burrow through the ground. Bite off a limb. Raise an undead servant. Hide behind stronger allies. Harass from the sky.

A monster usually has between 1-3 of these such moves, in addition to some other stats, that when it uses them, simply happen. Or if you're feeling generous, maybe you allow the target PC a Defy Danger roll (saving throw) first.

One last thing. You can totally have something very close to the whiff, nothing happens, move on result in RAW, or at least, Text-As-Written -- in at least two ways I can think of.

If you use the "show signs of impending doom" move, AKA the DW version of the "announce off-screen badness" MC move from ApocalypseWorld, you can do something as simple as, "After you whiff, the ground rumbles. Somewhere below you, the pit lord has decided this fight will need his attention. Moving along the the next player..."

Another way is a hack that building on the advice from the hacks chapter, which I've seen applied to many *World games that want to be more judicious with their Bad Stuff, save it up to drop in a big pile. I believe Tremulus, the Lovecraftian hack, does this: Note somehow that you as GM have acquired a point of GM hold, if you want to keep on moving with no bad stuff as consequences right now. Feel free to keep piling up hold, and then unleash it all in a shower of GM moves upon the hapless PCs at the moment of your choosing.

Quote from: RandallS;674729Side Note: The whole "moves" thing strikes me as an extra layer of busywork for the GM and players. Instead of just saying what they want to try to do, they have to figure out which "move" it falls under. Even if the players just say what they want to do, the GM is supposed to assign it a move (at least as I read the rules) and then resolve it, instead of just resolving it and not caring what move the action falls under. In the grand scheme of things, of course, this probably doesn't mean anything beyond the obvious, Dungeon World is not the game for me.

What Skywalker said is true. For players, many of the "basic moves" are the standard actions of any D&D game. You wanna hit a guy, here's how (in d20, the basic move just takes the form of BAB + mods + roll vs. defense). You wanna avoid something dangerous, here's how (d20 basic moves: make a saving throw, or appropriate skill check vs. target number). And any action is thought of as a "move", even if there's nothing written for the situation. These moves are like 65% of the game, you do the move, it happens like you described. No roll, no assigned move by the GM other than to say yes, it happens (or just let the players' narration of their own actions continue until you interrupt "I do this next..." with a metaphorical "No you fucking don't!").

"Action" and "Move" are in fact almost synonymous. Some actions simply happen to be codified, as in almost any RPG. The written moves (codified actions) are the ones with the fictional triggers, that in RAW must be used if the trigger fits. Obviously, this must is up to you to use or not use, as the hacks chapter suggests. In most d20 combats, if the fighter wants to hit the saber-ratting orc looking him dead in the eye, he's not suddenly going to say "I just hit him, it happens" or "I roll Use Rope and then I deal my sword damage."

As a GM, I have not even looked at the GM move sheet for the last 4 sessions we've played (because I literally gave it away to someone from a group I demo'ed for on Free RPG Day). In part, I know my options pretty well. In other part, the GM moves come close to describing at least 90% of everything you'd ever want to do as a GM. Here's the big winners, paraphrased:

Break their shit
Hit them with a monster
The monster does worse than just hit them
Hit them with something else
Split the party
It backfires
Make them wilt as they realize something horrible
More guys show up
Something bad happens to a PC right now
The PCs realize something bad is going to happen soon
Put someone between a rock & a hard place

They really should be thought of that broadly & flexibility. It's a source for inspiration, and to suggest the kind of Bad Things that are the hallmark over everything going wrong for players in Dungeon World.

Now, after all that: it's totally fine if you hate Dungeon World, people should hate it. Others should love it. Others should have no strong feelings either way. Monolithic adoration would be boring. I just don't like to see people version of Dungeon World that I think doesn't exist.

Quote from: _nthdegree;674751In the case of NPC or monster, this is what happens as a result of a miss.

Yep. FWIW its understandable for people to react to doing something that they have done for 30 years when its given a different name. But that reaction shouldn't confuse the change with something more significant.

Also, if it was just a change of name and nothing else (like the many thousand of GM variant we have), then that would be a ground for criticism too. But I think there is some potential value in the nomenclature changes made in DW for some RPGers.

Also, so it doesn't sound that I am being disingenuous, I am not saying here that DW doesn't have new approaches to old ideas in it. The underlying discussion of this thread is ultimately whether these changes are such that DW is no longer an RPG, and I think "GM Moves" are clearly not such changes.

QuoteNo, its not really the miss result I'm looking for. I want a miss that is just a miss. Misses should not require any "moves" by the GM. To me, that is just silly. When someone misses, I want to go on to the next PC, NPC, or monster for their action. 99 times out of 100, that's all that is going to happen (other than using up ammo, if the attack expended any).

You're not "getting" Dungeon World.  The mantra of the game is "fiction first."  If the fiction dictates that the archer misses, expends an arrow, and then it's the wizard's turn, then that's what happens.  If, on the other hand, the fiction dictates that something else happens, then something else happens.

Example with a simple miss:

QuoteMark: I hang back from the rest of the party and fire at the monster.  *rolls* Darn, I rolled a 3.
GM: The arrow sails overhead of the troll.  Bob, what are you doing?
Bob: I'm going to charge up to the troll and attack!

Example with the GM using a more elaborate move:

QuoteMark: I am going to try and fire a shot while the troll is distracted with Bob.  *rolls* Darn, I rolled a 3.
GM: Uh-oh, your shot doesn't quite land where you want it to.  In the confusion of the melee, it misses the troll and hits Bob!  Roll damage.
Mark: Six!  Sorry, Bob!
GM: Bob, you feel a sudden pain in your back as an arrow thunks into it.  What do you do?
Bob: I'm going to try and power through the pain and take off the troll's head!

Is it really that different than D&D?

Sidenote: I just talked myself into wanting to play some Dungeon World.  I'm hoping there will be some tables at Gencon.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;674755Is it really that different than D&D?

Yes.  Right here:
GM: Uh-oh, your shot doesn't quite land where you want it to.  In  the confusion of the melee, it misses the troll and hits Bob!  Roll  damage.

Do you remember typing that in, and how it was more than your original example of "you miss, who's next"?  Randall wants a simple "you miss, who's next?".  Assuming "fiction first" is really the goal, then the DM would be remiss in skipping their 'turn', according to the description of the rules.

Going strictly by the DMs Guide (pg 63), all missiles have a chance to hit just about anyone in melee, not just the misses.  Still different than D&D.  I will grant that most groups probably didn't adhere to that, but that doesn't change the fact that only misses have complications is different than (A)D&D.

Quote from: _nthdegree;674751One last thing. You can totally have something very close to the whiff, nothing happens, move on result in RAW, or at least, Text-As-Written -- in at least two ways I can think of.

If you use the "show signs of impending doom" move, AKA the DW version of the "announce off-screen badness" MC move from ApocalypseWorld, you can do something as simple as, "After you whiff, the ground rumbles. Somewhere below you, the pit lord has decided this fight will need his attention. Moving along the the next player..."

Let's see. I have nine players in my game, each has a PC (we'll ignore their hirelings, except to say they are more likely to miss than the PCs). As we just started playtesting Microlite81, the PCs are 1st and 2nd level. They miss maybe 40% of the time. Low level monsters miss a lot too. If I had to come up with some "off-screen badness" for each miss, not only would I run out of ideas before I ran out of misses, but why would all these off-screen beings/forces/etc care enough about a group of low-level adventurers to do things like make the ground rumble when they miss?  In I the campaign were set my Arn setting (which is an extremely high entropy setting: powerful entities who actively interfere in the world), that level of caring from off-screen badasses would be unbelievable.

QuoteAnother way is a hack that building on the advice from the hacks chapter, which I've seen applied to many *World games that want to be more judicious with their Bad Stuff, save it up to drop in a big pile.

Every time a character misses, bad stuff builds up against them for the future? Again, why? How does missing a sword attack cause this in the world? But ignoring that, I have no interesting in tracking the number of misses for future use? I try to minimize record-keeping.  

I just don't see why "missing" seems to require something game event other than the character missing.

Squire Ralph and The Knife are fighting an orc. Or more correctly the orc is attacking. The Knife and Ralph is attacking the orc from the rear. Ralph misses. The orc doesn't even know he's there so the orc is not going to do anything. Ralph just missed. The orc and The Knife will attack each other in their turn. Dungeon World seems to make it hard for things like this to happen. They happen a lot in my games.


What Skywalker said is true. For players, many of the "basic moves" are the standard actions of any D&D game. You wanna hit a guy, here's how (in d20, the basic move just takes the form of BAB + mods + roll vs. defense). You wanna avoid something dangerous, here's how (d20 basic moves: make a saving throw, or appropriate skill check vs. target number). And any action is thought of as a "move", even if there's nothing written for the situation. These moves are like 65% of the game, you do the move, it happens like you described. No roll, no assigned move by the GM other than to say yes, it happens (or just let the players' narration of their own actions continue until you interrupt "I do this next..." with a metaphorical "No you fucking don't!").

Quote"Action" and "Move" are in fact almost synonymous.

The difference I see is that characters acting in my games don't come with the baggage (forced GM actions) that DW Moves seem to have.

QuoteBreak their shit
Hit them with a monster
The monster does worse than just hit them
Hit them with something else
Split the party
It backfires
Make them wilt as they realize something horrible
More guys show up
Something bad happens to a PC right now
The PCs realize something bad is going to happen soon
Put someone between a rock & a hard place

Most of these would seldom make sense in my games as the result of most things players have their characters attempt to do.

QuoteNow, after all that: it's totally fine if you hate Dungeon World, people should hate it. Others should love it. Others should have no strong feelings either way. Monolithic adoration would be boring. I just don't like to see people version of Dungeon World that I think doesn't exist.

I don't hate Dungeon World. It's never done anything to me.  The rule book did not even bite me when I skimmed through it. I just don't get the game or why is it so popular with its fans. I can't see any reason I'd want to run a campaign under the Dungeon World system. As I've said before, that doesn't mean Dungeon World is a bad game, just that it is a game that is not for me.

Quote from: RandallS;674775Most of these would seldom make sense in my games as the result of most things players have their characters attempt to do.

IME 9 times out of 10 as a DW GM I do whatever instinctively makes sense on a miss, just like I would running D&D. Given the breadth of GM Moves, I have never come across a situation where what I did didn't fall into them.

As said, the nomenclature differs by calling what the GM does GM Moves, but you aren't supposed to look down the list, consider each one and then make a selection each time like you would in a board game or computer game.

For the remaining 1 time out of 10 is where I want to do something more and I can't think of anything. A quick scan over the list usually inspires what I do. IMO this is one value that DW adds by using the concept of GM Moves, mostly for new GMs but also for an old hat like me.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;674755You're not "getting" Dungeon World.  The mantra of the game is "fiction first."  If the fiction dictates that the archer misses, expends an arrow, and then it's the wizard's turn, then that's what happens.  If, on the other hand, the fiction dictates that something else happens, then something else happens.

This is where one of the places where the game and I disconnect. The "fiction" doesn't dictate anything in my games. I run sandbox campaigns, whatever happens becomes the fiction. But even that statement is stretching things because My RPG Sessions Do Not Generate Fiction -- at least not for any normal definition of "fiction."

This "Fiction First" attitude is one of the reasons I personally classify Dungeon World as a Narrative RPG.

Quote from: StormBringer;674761Yes.  Right here:
GM: Uh-oh, your shot doesn't quite land where you want it to.  In  the confusion of the melee, it misses the troll and hits Bob!  Roll  damage.

Do you remember typing that in, and how it was more than your original example of "you miss, who's next"?  Randall wants a simple "you miss, who's next?".

He can do a "you miss, who's next" if he really wants to.  There's nothing preventing him from doing that.  Dungeon World merely offers a handful of tools for GMs to do more than that if they so desire.

Quote from: RandallS;674777This is where one of the places where the game and I disconnect. The "fiction" doesn't dictate anything in my games. I run sandbox campaigns, whatever happens becomes the fiction. But even that statement is stretching things because My RPG Sessions Do Not Generate Fiction -- at least not for any normal definition of "fiction."

This "Fiction First" attitude is one of the reasons I personally classify Dungeon World as a Narrative RPG.

You're missing the concept.  "Fiction first" means taking into consideration what is happening in the game while the character is acting.  In the example I gave, the fiction is that Bob is in melee combat with the monster and thus there is a chance that Mark shoots him.  If Bob is not in melee range of the monster or Mark has a clear shot, there is not a chance for Mark's arrow to hit Bob.

In a traditional game, the GM might say, "Mark, you take a -5 penalty to your attack roll because you're shooting into melee, roll vs. Armor Class.  If you miss by five or less, the attack will hit Bob."  (My DM did this in a Star Wars game I was playing.)

In Dungeon World, the GM says, "Bob is locked in melee combat with the troll.  Mark, if you shoot, there's a chance you're going to hit him.  Roll 2d6 + Dex to see if you can get a clear shot."

Quote from: RandallS;674777This is where one of the places where the game and I disconnect. The "fiction" doesn't dictate anything in my games. I run sandbox campaigns, whatever happens becomes the fiction. But even that statement is stretching things because My RPG Sessions Do Not Generate Fiction -- at least not for any normal definition of "fiction."

This "Fiction First" attitude is one of the reasons I personally classify Dungeon World as a Narrative RPG.

This will be the last of my back-&-forthy missives for you, since I think we've probably come as close to any common understanding of the game as we can, and because I think this last topic is important.

"Fiction first" does NOT mean "consider the needs of the fictional tale we are collaboratively generating first," as the phrase might suggest, and as might be true of a narrative game or story-game.

The "fiction" mentioned is the in-game fiction of the world, the fiction that it is real, that it exists, that it has rules and obeys them. "The fiction" is shorthand for "the artificial construct in which we place the actions of this game" to get all fancy about it.

"Fiction first" means to have the specified rules of that shared artificial construct in the forefront of our minds for every proposed action (god, even I hate writing it out this way like a half-assed college paper).

I.E., suppose in the fiction we are sharing, it is expected and allowable that a man armed with a dagger can kill another man who is fast asleep with little or no difficulty, even if the dagger-wielding man is relatively unskilled. Thus, if we propose this action, instead of looking to a codified move like Hack & Slash (which doesn't really fit the trigger anyway) we use "fiction first," and since it fits our rules the action occurs successfully. (As "successful" as slitting a man's throat in the dead of night can be considered, anyway.) Whether or not the action does fit the fiction of the world is a decision largely in the hands of the GM, as you might expect, though players could certainly chip in with established rules & assumptions that might have been absentmindedly forgotten.

Each group's fiction will be a little different--or a lot different, as between the shared fiction of a game you would likely run, and the shared fiction of the kind of game I would. So your expectations for DW aren't wrong per se; the fiction you are consulting for your own "fiction first" imperative just differs greatly I think from that the game's creators had in mind themselves.

"Fiction first" is kind of the game's rule zero. It's an assumption present in many, probably even most RPGs by default; this is just how DW expresses it. It's really nothing groundbreaking or pretentious at all.

The very use of the term, however (as opposed to "game world" or "in character") has a kind of alienating effect.  One hears "fiction" and it instantly creates a barrier to Immersion, you are viewing your character not as a living virtual person, but as a piece of fiction.  It seems to me that its very purpose is to remind you that "its not real" or something like that, to intentionally alienating you from immersing in your character or in the setting.

RPGPundit