The Bard’s Charming and Open says “When you speak frankly with someone, you can ask their player a question from the…

The Bard’s Charming and Open says “When you speak frankly with someone, you can ask their player a question from the…

The Bard’s Charming and Open says “When you speak frankly with someone, you can ask their player a question from the list below” (emphasis mine).

In this case is the GM also a “player” so that this applies to NPCs? Or does this move only apply to PCs?

We’ve been playing it like the former.

24 thoughts on “The Bard’s Charming and Open says “When you speak frankly with someone, you can ask their player a question from the…”

  1. I would also say GM is a player. The variance in phrasing is odd, but I don’t think it’s meaningful. Check out Parley, by the way, that one specifies “GM character.”

  2. Its phrased this way to show the difference. The player has to answer truthfully.

    The bard could pick up the answer by watching body language or reading into other small talk etc. The bard character isn’t actually asking the question to the other charater.

    Its something that happens between players.

    And yes, GM is the player for all of the other NPCs

  3. If we are going to be “fundamentalistically” literal about the wording (which I think is a little silly) – I am hearing that the bard and a character are talking. The bard is being open and honest. While this interaction is happening, the bard player asks the player running the other character a question. That player must give honest information in response to the question. It doesn’t have to be in-character speech. In response to “What do you wish I would do,” the other player could (for instance) say, “As you talk, he leans in attentively, staring you right in the eyes. You are pretty sure he wants to be kissed.” The move governs that the player must answer the question (verbally). But it doesn’t specify how that info is delivered in-character. 

  4. My feeling is that as long as the trigger is met, it doesn’t matter how the Bard gets the information Eric Lochstampfor​. The players are asking the questions, and the move doesn’t say anything about doing so in character.

    If the player asks “Who do you serve?” I think it’s totally fine to describe a tiny hawk tattoo on the guardsman’s neck that marks them as a member of the Raptor Gang.

  5. Sure. But the difference is how the move was triggered Eric Lochstampfor​. Did the Bard talk frankly and honestly with the guardsman? Then it’s Charming and Open and the players ask their questions. Did the Bard intently study the guardsman while they were talking? Then it’s Discern Realities and the player rolls dice.

    I really don’t think it matters that two separate moves can yeild the same results; what matters is what the character does to get those results.

  6. Discern Realities only allows a completely different set of questions.  You can’t do ANY of the things from Open and Honest with Discern Realities.

    You aren’t even TECHNICALLY right.


    DR, Spout Lore, Parley and Defy Danger w/ CHA all require dice to hit the table. C&O does not, which means the move CAN NOT blow up in your face. That’s a a HUGE distinction, so yes knowing the proper trigger is important.

    ALSO the examples of spotting tattoos and body language are bad examples of C&O and I don’t think they work.

    IMHO the move is clearly calling for the Bard to start a conversation with another character. You might hand wave the roleplaying part of it but the move is also giving the GM a “golden opportunity” to fill the  players lives with a memorable NPC and fill their lives with adventure which is 95% of the FUN of the C&O move.

  8. I don’t think Eric Lochstampfor​, that anyone here is suggesting that Charming and Open can be triggered by the Bard spotting tattoos or noticing body language. The move obviously has to be triggered by the Bard conversing with the subject, and being Frank and honest.

    What I and others are saying is that there is nothing in the move that says the information the Bard gets has to be spoken by the subject.

  9. You can always close the thread to comments; that would be my call. Why the fuck does all this matter? DW is too flexible and freeform for this kind of argument to be meaningful (or interesting — it stopped being interesting about a dozen posts back). The DW text can’t survive dissection. As a whole, it is a living entity that moves gracefully and will tear your face off with a deft swipe when you let it run around on the table, but the minute someone starts cutting it open and labeling organs it just becomes a messy pile of guts. (That was a silly analogy; my point is the text won’t hold up to an expectation that it is air-tight and every word choice is exact.)

    If the situation seems right for the move to follow, it should trigger. Some times, though, a situation is not 100% a letter-for-letter perfect fit for a move but the situation is so damned charged up that you know SOME move has to trigger and dice have to hit the table and “this move” (whichever one you have in mind) is the best fit of the bunch. 

Comments are closed.