So, in a nutshell, how does this game work? Just to get *some* idea without having to buy or even read it, which I'd really rather not.

I'm surprised, my take on it was that the GM has a more powerful role than in, say, D&D 3e.  Dungeon World strikes me as a bit like a freeform role-playing game where the GM decides when to use the mechanics, and which ones.

For example, when an ogre swings its axe at you, there's no one mechanic that resolves this; it depends on how the player(s) react, and then the GM makes a judgement call about what mechanic to use. Maybe "Defy Danger", maybe something else.  The GM might decide that the player's attempt to dodge succeeds automatically, because ogres are slow; the GM might decide that the player has already granted a "golden opportunity" for a hard move, by deciding to get within club range can arbitrarily inflict damage.

Quote from: Brad;667407Yeah, after reading about half the book, I can safely say it's not an RPG, at least not how I typically understand one to be. In the first thirty pages, "the fiction" must appear at least twice per paragraph.

I thought they were using that term just to refer to the 'stuff going on in (fictional) game world'.

Quote from: HombreLoboDomesticado;667617So, in a nutshell, how does this game work? Just to get *some* idea without having to buy or even read it, which I'd really rather not.

I'd say the PDF is worth $10, honestly. There are some good ideas applicable to RPGs within. Having never engaged in a session, though, I cannot tell you how it works at the table. From the text, it appears that the GM writes up Moves (the book's concept for "things you can do") and poses them as challenges to the players. The players respond with their own Moves, and roll dice appropriately. A low roll means the GM decides what happens, a middling roll means the Move was successful but with possible side-effects, and a high roll results in the player dictating the action.

This last part is where I take issue with DW being called an RPG: the GM is not the final authority regarding how successes are interpreted. That is not a conventional GM, and instead it's a more collaborative effort. This isn't to say RPGs don't use similar mechanics (at least in appearance), but ultimately the GM can make arbitrary choices as he is the referee. In DW, the referee is a nebulous concept, due to shared authority.

Quote from: Brad;667608"isn't collaborating" is the key phrase in that sentence.

To clarify yet again, Dungeon World's GM isn't as distinct as a GM in a conventional RPG.

I didnt find that to be the case in play àt all. Maybe we were doing it wrong, but the GM/player dynamic seemed exactly the same as playing D&D

Quote from: TristramEvans;667633I didnt find that to be the case in play àt all. Maybe we were doing it wrong, but the GM/player dynamic seemed exactly the same as playing D&D

Interdasting.

So it doesn't play like it reads?

Quote from: Brad;667613The story is what you talk about when the game is over; when you're playing the actual game, there is no story. Unlike Dungeon World.

That's the distinction, I think.

Theres no collaborative storytelling going on in DW though. Im not sure where you are deriving that from. The players play their characters and are not called upon to metagame by the rules to any extent beyong any trad rpg.

Quote from: Brad;667637Interdasting.

So it doesn't play like it reads?

Im not certain, in that I read the game mainly as advice to steer a new GM in a certain direction. I never saw an onus on the players to engage in gm activities once play began. I had a niggle or two (we dropped the 'players only roll' caveat early on as it felt disassociative to roll damage against our own characters) but beyond that it didnt, from a player perspective, operate much differently than a streamlined basic d&d game. Our gm for that campaign, who is a pretty fervent simulationist, based every event on random rolls, and we just played our characters.

Quote from: Brad;667632I'd say the PDF is worth $10, honestly. There are some good ideas applicable to RPGs within. Having never engaged in a session, though, I cannot tell you how it works at the table. From the text, it appears that the GM writes up Moves (the book's concept for "things you can do") and poses them as challenges to the players. The players respond with their own Moves, and roll dice appropriately. A low roll means the GM decides what happens, a middling roll means the Move was successful but with possible side-effects, and a high roll results in the player dictating the action.

This is totally off.  First of all, if you're curious, most of the rules are available free via the Creative Commons release.  Go to the website below and browse the menus on the top for the options.  

http://book.dwgazetteer.com/

The main difference from standard RPGs is that only the players roll.  In combat, just the player rolls - failure is the PC takes damage, limited success both take damage, full success only the opponent is damaged.  A similar principle applies to most other actions (called Moves).  Instead of the monster taking an action and rolling attack, the GM describes the monster attacking.  If the player fights it, he rolls the Hack-and-Slash move.  If he runs away, he rolls the Defy Danger move.  (If he does nothing, there is no move and the GM just does damage to him.)  

There is nothing about players narrating their successes.  I suppose you could play it that way, but there is nothing in the rules that specifies that.  

Dungeon World is on the loose, rules-light, lots of latitude side of systems - but most things work roughly the same way as traditional RPGs.  There are opponents to fight, you go fight them and roll dice to see who wins.  You get rewards and treasure as a result.

Quote from: jhkim;667643This is totally off.

Is it now? So I just read a book that explains to players how Moves work, and I interpret it to mean exactly what I said, yet it's "totally off"?

QuoteThere is nothing about players narrating their successes. I suppose you could play it that way, but there is nothing in the rules that specifies that.

Again, what? The players are inherently narrating after a success. They're creating a collaborative story, per the rules, so I have no idea WTF else you'd call it.

Maybe you're another DW apologist; I get it. But from actually READING THE RULES, everything I stated is accurate, at least according to how it's written. If there's some other interpretation diametrically opposed to my conclusions, perhaps the book is poorly written and ambiguous.

Anyway, I'm done talking about Dungeon World. It doesn't appeal to me as an RPG, and thus fails. If other people want to play it, have fun, just don't try to convince me I'm am idiot because I prefer traditional RPGs.

Quote from: Brad;667637So it doesn't play like it reads?

Or perhaps you are just misreading it? The presentation in DW is reasonably novel if you haven't read anything like it, so that's understandable.

FWIW I have run DW quite a lot this year and my experiences mirror Tristam Evans. DW plays pretty much as how I played AD&D1e back in early 80s. The DM has just as much power and discretion (possibly more so, given the high chance of consequences on any roll) and the gameplay sees the PCs having to overcome a series of dangers.

I am not sure where you have got the concept of collaboration from, other than its common usage in RPGs since the mid 80s in Star Wars WEG and WW, as other have already pointed out.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;667582I completely understand the desire to not have games you like caregorized as non-rpgs, i dont find arguments that these games are not or cannot be rpgs, all that compelling personally. But when you blatantly try to inverse the disussion into narrative rpgs being the real rpgs and traditional rpgs bing the real story games, it is very hard to take you seriously as a poster.

Careful. Your (considerable) bias is showing.

Quote from: Brad;667646If there's some other interpretation diametrically opposed to my conclusions, perhaps the book is poorly written and ambiguous.

I just found a HUGE PDF explaining how to read the poorly written and ambiguous rules.

Quote from: jadrax;667658I just found a HUGE PDF explaining how to read the poorly written and ambiguous rules.

The DW Guide is a great read. I am pretty sure there is a fault of logic to assume that this means that DW is somehow poorly written and ambiguous rules, but that topic seems like a bit of a threadjack.

Quote from: Skywalker;667649Careful. Your (considerable) bias is showing.

Dude, he's the nice one.

Quote from: Skywalker;667649Careful. Your (considerable) bias is showing.

I am not sure I see the bias. I basically agreed that DW sounds like an rpg, but disagree with his attempts to  turn the argument on its head and try to argue that traditional rpgs are the real story games (he did something similar with sandboxes a while back as well, and I disagreed in a similar manner then). These are just linguistic tricks, not serious arguments. There are plenty of posters on his side of the fence I take seriously, including you. But my feeling is his arguments lately are just there to create confusion and stir things up. And since this comes fresh on the heels of his defense of rape fantasy argument, I just have a very hard time taking him seriously as a poster when he does this stuff.