Episode 53 of Discern Realities is here!
This episode is a little longer than usual, but the conversations are nice and in-depth. Here is what is in this episode:
I reflect on the We Hunt the Keepers! DW campaign; we take a look at Ray Otus’s Plundergrounds #5; we go in deep on how to handle a miss on Cast a Spell, and the thematic considerations for both Wizard and Cleric versions of the move; we read two contest entries: The Orphan’s Kiss and The Joyous Pit (text for each is on the website); and we continue our AP of the story of St. Evelyn the White.
Enjoy!
Yay! That’s a nice surprise. I can’t wait to listen.
Yay! That’s a nice surprise. I can’t wait to listen.
.
.
Great episode. I’m excited for the pocket-sized play version of we hunt the keepers! I loved watching you guys play, but getting the editorial commentary is super interesting.
Great episode. I’m excited for the pocket-sized play version of we hunt the keepers! I loved watching you guys play, but getting the editorial commentary is super interesting.
Asbjørn H Flø it’s going to be a little different from PSP in the sense that each episode won’t have my commentary over it. There is, however, a special Episode 0 that will air before it launches where we discuss stuff like that.
Asbjørn H Flø it’s going to be a little different from PSP in the sense that each episode won’t have my commentary over it. There is, however, a special Episode 0 that will air before it launches where we discuss stuff like that.
Great episode! Ray Otus, I agree with Jason Cordova. Plundergrounds is just becoming more and more awe inspiring all the time.
I really liked the discussion about magical failures on this one! This podcast does what hobby-oriented shows should do. It gives me something cool to try and makes me want to play DW!
Great episode! Ray Otus, I agree with Jason Cordova. Plundergrounds is just becoming more and more awe inspiring all the time.
I really liked the discussion about magical failures on this one! This podcast does what hobby-oriented shows should do. It gives me something cool to try and makes me want to play DW!
I know fucking up fireballs well.
I know fucking up fireballs well.
Ah, yeah! I just listened. Thank you for all the love! And I’m glad you explained your contribution (and probably undersold it) Jason Cordova. You have definitely been invaluable.
Ah, yeah! I just listened. Thank you for all the love! And I’m glad you explained your contribution (and probably undersold it) Jason Cordova. You have definitely been invaluable.
Great episode. As always a joy listening to you.
Some thoughts on the 6- on Cast Spell:
1) Coming from my Dark Eye background I love the way you differentiated Wizard and Cleric misses: one more chaotic, the other questioning or threatening faith (to summarise less elegantly than how David metaphorically did it).
It’s a bit similar in The Dark Eye. Interestingly, the interpretation what a miss for a Cleric’s spell means has been one of the major changes through each edition. Sometimes clerics were just tools of their gods and is was actually the god acting that spell through them, in other editions the divine energy was granted by the god but now it’s up to the cleric what to do with it and the god could only stop giving them the divine energy again.
I think it would make sense to take some time with the player of a Wizard or Cleric to talk with them how they imagine their powers work and then built the 6- based on their concept. I loved for example how Logan in We Hunt the Keepers had such an ambiguous relationship to his magic, never really trusting himself. That was something built into every failure he made.
2) One other thing which left me a bit irritated. You insisted on that the 6- doesn’t have to be connected with the action and that this is one of the important points in DW. I have to say I wouldn’t like that and I think I haven’t seen you doing that the times we played together. Would you really go for: “your fireball fizzled… and now the goblin patrol has finally found you?” Also the examples you made all had a connection, like: “your fireball fizzles… and because of the loud explosions coming from that, the goblin patrol finally found you?” That seems to be more satisfying for everybody.
As a player I want to see a connection between my actions, not an abstract counter moving forward somewhere. Did I get you wrong or would you really say that 6- can and sometimes should be totally unrelated?
Great episode. As always a joy listening to you.
Some thoughts on the 6- on Cast Spell:
1) Coming from my Dark Eye background I love the way you differentiated Wizard and Cleric misses: one more chaotic, the other questioning or threatening faith (to summarise less elegantly than how David metaphorically did it).
It’s a bit similar in The Dark Eye. Interestingly, the interpretation what a miss for a Cleric’s spell means has been one of the major changes through each edition. Sometimes clerics were just tools of their gods and is was actually the god acting that spell through them, in other editions the divine energy was granted by the god but now it’s up to the cleric what to do with it and the god could only stop giving them the divine energy again.
I think it would make sense to take some time with the player of a Wizard or Cleric to talk with them how they imagine their powers work and then built the 6- based on their concept. I loved for example how Logan in We Hunt the Keepers had such an ambiguous relationship to his magic, never really trusting himself. That was something built into every failure he made.
2) One other thing which left me a bit irritated. You insisted on that the 6- doesn’t have to be connected with the action and that this is one of the important points in DW. I have to say I wouldn’t like that and I think I haven’t seen you doing that the times we played together. Would you really go for: “your fireball fizzled… and now the goblin patrol has finally found you?” Also the examples you made all had a connection, like: “your fireball fizzles… and because of the loud explosions coming from that, the goblin patrol finally found you?” That seems to be more satisfying for everybody.
As a player I want to see a connection between my actions, not an abstract counter moving forward somewhere. Did I get you wrong or would you really say that 6- can and sometimes should be totally unrelated?
Gerrit Reininghaus you understand correctly what we said; I have used the missed roll to advance a front, sometimes even giving the player the benefit of what they were attempting to do. I have seen players satisfied with the outcome because it signals to them just how bad whatever is happening that they aren’t aware of when I give them the benefit of their attempt. I don’t do it all the time or often, but when I do there is often an unspoken moment of dread when does happen.
Gerrit Reininghaus you understand correctly what we said; I have used the missed roll to advance a front, sometimes even giving the player the benefit of what they were attempting to do. I have seen players satisfied with the outcome because it signals to them just how bad whatever is happening that they aren’t aware of when I give them the benefit of their attempt. I don’t do it all the time or often, but when I do there is often an unspoken moment of dread when does happen.
Gerrit Reininghaus So, to be clear, when I advance a front on a miss, I usually let the move work as if it was a 10+, and then use the miss to advance a front in some way (or I take it as hold to spend later). And you have definitely seen me do that, even if you didn’t register what I was doing (because I probably didn’t say “I’m advancing a front because of your miss.”)
Gerrit Reininghaus So, to be clear, when I advance a front on a miss, I usually let the move work as if it was a 10+, and then use the miss to advance a front in some way (or I take it as hold to spend later). And you have definitely seen me do that, even if you didn’t register what I was doing (because I probably didn’t say “I’m advancing a front because of your miss.”)
Gerrit Reininghaus As for the idea of an “abstract counter,” many PbtA games work this way. The Sprawl is probably the most direct example. In that game, whole aspects of the mission and setting that are entirely offscreen change in the background because of missed rolls.
Gerrit Reininghaus As for the idea of an “abstract counter,” many PbtA games work this way. The Sprawl is probably the most direct example. In that game, whole aspects of the mission and setting that are entirely offscreen change in the background because of missed rolls.
Jason Cordova David LaFreniere Thank you two for clarifying.
Good that I will soon listen to our We Hunt the Keepers episodes again, so I can see where and how it happened and remember how I felt about it at that time.
On the theoretical level I’m currently thinking it doesn’t sound satisfying for me as a player (others might see that totally different) and it is something I try to avoid when GMing.
It sounds as abstract as the exchange of Fate points: you succeed on this roll although rolling low but future, fictionally totally unrelated doom comes closer.
Some games make that easier: when the characters believe in destiny for example. So for my Sagas of the Icelanders games I was more deliberate about fictionally unrelated GM Moves: maybe because you used an unfair argument against your sister to win the case it had to happen that only a couple of minutes later the messenger with bad news about our father comes in.
Jason Cordova David LaFreniere Thank you two for clarifying.
Good that I will soon listen to our We Hunt the Keepers episodes again, so I can see where and how it happened and remember how I felt about it at that time.
On the theoretical level I’m currently thinking it doesn’t sound satisfying for me as a player (others might see that totally different) and it is something I try to avoid when GMing.
It sounds as abstract as the exchange of Fate points: you succeed on this roll although rolling low but future, fictionally totally unrelated doom comes closer.
Some games make that easier: when the characters believe in destiny for example. So for my Sagas of the Icelanders games I was more deliberate about fictionally unrelated GM Moves: maybe because you used an unfair argument against your sister to win the case it had to happen that only a couple of minutes later the messenger with bad news about our father comes in.
Gerrit Reininghaus I mean, I wouldn’t say it’s something I do often, but I have definitely done it. Obviously, connecting it up with the fiction that just took place is ideal. It’s a pretty rare circumstance where something completely unrelated to the present fiction takes place as the result of a missed roll.
Gerrit Reininghaus I mean, I wouldn’t say it’s something I do often, but I have definitely done it. Obviously, connecting it up with the fiction that just took place is ideal. It’s a pretty rare circumstance where something completely unrelated to the present fiction takes place as the result of a missed roll.
Jason Cordova Yes! Like the example you gave in the show when the whole group is giving the wizard the look because of her out of control fireball. Shaking through party dynamics is the best!
Jason Cordova Yes! Like the example you gave in the show when the whole group is giving the wizard the look because of her out of control fireball. Shaking through party dynamics is the best!
I really like the overview of the open table style of campaign you did and I look forward to the PSP!
I really like the overview of the open table style of campaign you did and I look forward to the PSP!