Tinkering with a move for a know-it-all type character. Thoughts?
Steeped in Lore: When you declare a fact about a mysterious subject and have empty slots below, ask the GM if you are clearly right or clearly wrong. If you are neither, write it down below in an empty slot.
1)
2)
3)
When your declaration is put to the test, roll +INT. *On a 7+, it’s exactly as you said. *On a 10+, also take +1 forward. *On a miss, the GM will reveal just how wrong you were. Regardless, erase your declaration.
So, how is it different than Spout Lore?
Pundit
When you assess a political situation and call it like you see it, write your position in a slot below and roll+INT. On a 10+, hold 2. On 7-9, hold 1. On a 6-, hold 1 but the GM will make a move. Hold may be spent, 1 for 1, to take +1 forward when you leverage a listed position.
–________
–________
–________
You may erase a listed position at any time.
/
Peter Johansen With Spout Lore, as written, it’s the GM’s prerogative to come up with the interesting and possibly useful information. Yes, they might deffer to the player. And in plenty of play groups, the players feel comfortable/empowered to declare facts as a way to trigger Spout Lore. But that’s a play-style thing, not how the move is actually written.
This actively gives the player agency, permission, and encouragement to author useful and interesting information. The odds are better than Spout Lore, because on a 7-9 the useful & interesting info is true (as opposed to just interesting info on a Spout Lore). And because it delays the roll until the information is tested, no one knows if the information is right until it matters. And that cuts out some of the metagame of knowing you’re right or suspecting you’re wrong because the dice told you.
The 3 slots are there to prevent spamming the move and to keep it easy to track “undecided” statements. Also, to encourage you test them (thus freeing up slots).
The move suffers a bit from comprehension complexity. I had to read it 3 times before I really got what was going on. Not quite sure how to fix that though.
I disagree with Tom and I quite like this move
I like where the original move is headed but my critiques would be that it’s presented more like two interlocking moves and could be simplified. Additionally, it would be better if the move provided a benefit to declaring things about the world and its mysteries regardless of whether it turned out to be true or not. As is, it amplifies the stakes of declaring facts by either giving a +1 forward or having the GM make a harder move on a miss and conservative players might actually be less likely to risk declaring facts, even if they had a high intelligence.
When you declare a fact about the world, a monster, or an item. Roll +INT on a 10+ It is just how you said. The GM can ask how your character knows this. On a 7-9 The Gm can add a twist, your information is broadly true but certain details have been messed up. On a miss tell the GM in what way the information is deadly to you
That might force the GM to brake their prep though. You can’t write a move like that. It messes with too many things.
How is that different with a lot of things Dungeon World does? I feel Dungeon World says Prep is the base but your players are really what builds it up and sometimes building it will move the groundwork so GMs should be able to deal with that.
Indeed, waiting to nail down the fiction is a good practice but GMs need to be able to make moves off screen too. Giving players unrestrained authorship overrides the GM’s ability to commit to those moves.
When you say X is like Y in your prep then that is a fact in the game world. When a player says X isn’t like Y then it is your job as a GM to say them no. That is what Exploit your prep means.
You can do that as well, you can reword it, you can say uh I don’t think the magical unicorn fits in this game. All I see this doing is giving a bit more control on the players side in putting things in the world that there willing to roll the dice and fail on.