thread: 2011-04-08 : Freeform
On 2011-04-14, Jaywalt wrote:
Simon, okay, I get the "take-back window" concept. But I don't think Ghost Opera, by default, has a take-back window. You decide what you're gonna do, and then the GM or other player decides how to respond. It's definitely about choices made in the moment! I don't necessarily know what you're going to do and you don't necessarily know what I'm going to do.
Here's an example of deterministic resolution in Ghost Opera, which I wrote a while back. In the example, I wrote John as pressing really hard for his goal, showing how the GM could respond to that and make it cool. But John could have made other choices and led to a more complex encounter. Maybe the shaman heard his character coming. Maybe the whispering of his character's childhood names disturbed him enough to make him hesitate. Also, I as the GM could have done wildly different things too. Maybe the shaman could have tried to run away deep into the bog.
In Ghost Opera, at least in my mind, is still "to do it, do it," with no takebacks. The uncertainly in resolution just comes from the choices made by other players (and, really, yourself too, since you can always surprise yourself by the choices you end up making).
That said, you can always create a take-back window, in my experience, by phrasing your statements as questions or options and asking for confirmation from your fellow players. If John said, "So I sneak up with him from behind, yeah?" Then, I have a chance to intervene and say, "Well, his back's to an ancient stone wall, but you could drop down on him from above, maybe." We're making hypothetical statements now, not assertions or statements of what's happening.
Does that make sense or are you talking about something slightly different?
