thread: 2011-02-21 : Into the Unknown?
On 2011-03-29, David Berg wrote:
Okay, cool, we're on the same page about concrete assurance being key to a clear connection. What I'm trying to identify is where to draw the line between concrete and not. I hear ya on lists not being the only option; I'm just trying to hone in on what criteria separate the good options from the bad. To that end, let me see where irrelevant outcomes pop up in GM ad-lib, and how those are addressed by your example:
Relevance envisioned but not communicated
Perhaps the outcome list serves as a reminder to the GM to keep talking until the relevance of the outcome has been communicated to the players? It's entirely on the GM to make that happen; but with the relevance written out in front of him, perhaps it's less likely that he'll just narrate what happens, receive blank stares, and clam up?
Relevance delayed without notice
Or perhaps the key is that the players see the GM looking at a list, and can correlate their actions with that, in a way that they can't with just talking? I'm thinking specifically of situations when the GM is thinking, "Okay, you haven't done enough yet to get a relevant outcome; what next?" Refusing to look at a sheet might communicate that better than roleplaying an NPC who just says "Oh"?
Or do you think neither case is sufficient without a formal cue on the player side, i.e., a die to roll or key phrase to utter, that says, "I want a relevant outcome now?"
Tahamaat
I like it. The stuff you have to roll for (e.g. overcome cowardice to enter a conflict) is nicely specific to the fictional reality of life under a space tyrant.
