Forum > Design, Development, and Gameplay
Roll dice or say "yes."
luke:
Since we're having a party over here, I thought I'd join in, too. It irritated the hell out of me that no one referenced the exact text for the mythical and fabled "Say 'Yes'" in this kerfu , so I thought I'd post it. This is text from my game, which also happens to quote Vincent's original text. It's a double whammy on discount just for you:
--- Quote from: From The Burning Wheel page 75 ---
Vincent’s Admonition
In his game, Dogs in the Vineyard, Vincent Baker articulates a convention of Burning Wheel so well that I’d rather use his words than my own. He says:
Every moment of play, roll dice or say “yes.”
If nothing is at stake, say “yes” [to the player’s request], whatever they’re doing. Just go along with them. If they ask for information, give it to them. If they have their characters go somewhere, they’re there. If they want it, it’s theirs.
Sooner or later—sooner, because [your game’s] pregnant with crisis—they’ll have their characters do something that someone else won’t like. Bang! Something’s at stake. Start the conflict and roll the dice.
Roll dice, or say “yes.”
Vincent’s advice is perfect for Burning Wheel. Unless there is something at stake in the story you have created, don’t bother with the dice. Keep moving, keep describing, keep roleplaying. But as soon as your character wants something—needs something—that he doesn’t have, that he doesn’t know, that someone else has, roll the dice.
Flip that around and it reveals a fundamental rule in Burning Wheel game play: When there is conflict, roll the dice. There is no social agreement for the resolution of conflict in this game. Roll the dice and let the obstacle system guide the outcome. Success or failure doesn’t really matter. So long as the intent of the task is clearly stated, the story is going somewhere.
--- End quote ---
As you can see, the "Roll the dice or say yes" rule is for conflict resolution. The issues presented in the referenced thread surrounding the introduction of the crazy H-Bomb or the "solve the mystery now" or "I want be at the end of the dungeon" are not really covered by this rule. They are actually covered in an area above this rule -- the social contract of the gaming group. Egregious and outlandish requests that go beyond the scope of the game you've all agreed to play are addressed by the group as a whole, not by GM fiat or anything like that. You agreed to play DnD, so there's no H-Bombs and there's a particular system you must use to get to the end of the dungeon. That's some basic stuff that's left unspoken in most groups and games. In a few games and groups, it's explicit.
Also, it's worth noting that "Vincent's Admonition" is not a rule in the same context as, say, Advancement in Burning Wheel. It's not a "mechanic" per se. Just like in Dogs, it's advice for how to run the game for best results; it's an explicit statement not to roadblock the players and it's grease in the game set up wheels that helps get to big and important conflicts faster.
-Luke
Post Script: I would like to publicly and formally ask for forebearance and mercy in this thread (and any others I post here, really). Please refrain from calling me and my friends names. I would appreciate it and I think you will, too.
Settembrini:
See? It's special rules for special games with special premises. No right or even claim whatsoever to be a universal law. So no right or need to bring it up in dicussions, where Adventure Gaming is concerned.
Adventure Gamin is Character-Task centered. It's also ressource centered.
Conflict Resolution is as important to Adventure Games, as equipment lists are for Thematic Games.,
Nobody cares for what you want, it's all about what your Character can plausibly do. And there you can have all kinds of "No", as a world modeled after reality, and not after the "issues, stakes and story goals" of the players, has all kinds of impossibilites.
Case settled.
JamesV:
--- Quote from: Settembrini ---See? It's special rules for special games with special premises. No right or even claim whatsoever to be a universal law. So no right or need to bring it up in dicussions, where Adventure Gaming is concerned.
Adventure Gamin is Character-Task centered. It's also ressource centered.
Conflict Resolution is as important to Adventure Games, as equipment lists are for Thematic Games.,
Nobody cares for what you want, it's all about what your Character can plausibly do. And there you can have all kinds of "No", as a world modeled after reality, and not after the "issues, stakes and story goals" of the players, has all kinds of impossibilites.
Case settled.
--- End quote ---
What I'm wondering is why you insist on taking a piece of advice and taking it so broadly that it becomes useless in your games. It has a place and even a greater context in adventure gaming that you seem to be just unwilling to accept at your table. But maybe I'm wrong.
Spike:
on the face of it, and reading how it is written in at least ONE source, I would agree that 'roll or say yes' is not in and of itself... bad.
Seriously, it is an excellent method of keeping things running smoothly and not getting bogged down in minutae. And if you are like me, so used to getting refused when playing that when you GM you treat every request for anything as a personal affront, its a great reminded to let things go and let the players enjoy the game a little.
But... we aren't dealing with the intent, or the face of things. The problem is in the wording, in the depiction. The Burnign wheel quote may be fairly harmlessly worded, but there are other quotable versions out there, adn the very hardest proponents are claiming it should be a hard written rule that hte GM can't refuse anything the players want without a spectacular reason. And who has time for spectacular reasons? I don't.
Yes is not always the answer. In fact, saying no to even 'idiot simple' requests can provide a more interesting story for players. Conflict isn't always big battles. Think about the road warrior movie: Getting the damn truck was half the movie. (yes there was fighting gettign the truck... bear with me here...)
my five cents cause I'm too verbose to stick with two...
JamesV:
--- Quote from: Spike ---But... we aren't dealing with the intent, or the face of things. The problem is in the wording, in the depiction. The Burnign wheel quote may be fairly harmlessly worded, but there are other quotable versions out there, adn the very hardest proponents are claiming it should be a hard written rule that hte GM can't refuse anything the players want without a spectacular reason. And who has time for spectacular reasons? I don't.
--- End quote ---
Must the discussion always be framed in the terms of the most extreme opinions on this matter? Because for as far as I can tell, the people who've been involved in this discussion don't even espouse them. I'm not up on my rhetoric, but that's kind of a strawman. "You like 'yes or roll 'em' , so you're for free AK-47s for D&D PCs!"
--- Quote from: Spike ---Yes is not always the answer. In fact, saying no to even 'idiot simple' requests can provide a more interesting story for players. Conflict isn't always big battles. Think about the road warrior movie: Getting the damn truck was half the movie. (yes there was fighting gettign the truck... bear with me here...)
--- End quote ---
You know that's a actually a great argument for 'yes or roll 'em' because there's a huge, huge difference between.
Q: Can I have a truck?
A: No.
and
Q: Can I have a truck?
A: Well, you've heard rumors that if you head for...
or
A: You can try to find one.
The former kills the whole situation dead. The latter is the basis for a whole night's fun in a post-apocalyptic wasteland.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page