During the feedback time for the oracle, an interesting discussion began about a certain move that allows you to ask these questions with discern realities:
Third Eye
When you discern realities, you can ask one of these questions:
What here is magical? The GM will answer truthfully.
What does this magic item do?
What is the alignment of this creature?
In the discussion it was mentioned that these questions can already be answered with discern realities. Thoughts?
Well… yes. Those questions can be answered with Discern Realities. But the player would have to ask the broad questions of “What here is useful or valuable to me?” or “What here is not what it appears to be?”. What your move does is let players ask questions with more specific answers. So I don’t see a problem with you move.
What happened here recently?
What is about to happen?
What should I be on the lookout for?
What here is useful or valuable to me?
Who’s really in control here?
What here is not what it appears to be?
What here is magical? is a quicker/easier question for your GM to answer than “useful/valuable” or “What here is not what it appears to be?” and would inspire more magical results presumably.
None of the questions would necessarily tell you what a magic item would do or what a creature’s alignment was. You could get hints for sure, but your questions would yield firm answers.
Yeah, I think they’re solid. Only suggestion would be to replace “alignment” with something like”dominant emotion” or even “drive or instinct.” Lots of tables hand wave alignment, play without it entirely, and/or use a combo of Drive and Alignment for PCs.
^What Chris said.
Alternatively, you might attempt to work something into the wording that explains how Third Eye allows you to discern the reality of things beyond the normal senses. Perhaps the sight extends forwards and back into time a bit if needed etc.
Victor Julio Hurtado I may yoink this for a hack I’m working on.
Jeremy Strandberg Why not a combo? What is the alignment/drive/instict of the creature? Or a note that to use whatever the table has in the place of alignment? Emotion could be handy, but seems a big change from the alignment notion.
Oh, sure. A combo works great, too. I think trying to explain “or whatever you use” in the description would be too clunky.
I think i’ll go the “make a note about it” route. Like Jeremy Strandberg says, it seems a bit clunky trying to explain it on the move itself. Ari Black go right ahead!