09-09-2026, 10:11 PM
(09-09-2026, 07:20 PM)misha Wrote: Oh, this is really good. I don't have anything interesting to say on 1 or 4, but. . .
For 3, I do think that abduction is a huge part of what I love in play, and something I very much design my dungeons to support. I guess I do that with deduction (okay, maybe prep itself isn't inferring itself, but hopefully you get what I mean)? It does feel a bit like whatever the GM is using to prep is the mirror of what the players will then get something from doing mid-game; when I make a deduction in prep it lets the players fruitfully make abductive inferences.
And I think for 2, I feel like deductive inferences are more creative and feel better in the short term--for situations where you're creating the fiction rather than predicting it you end with with a result that's much more satisfying, but also once you finish with that specific instance you're done with it. Abductive inferences feel less 'creative', but also feel to me like they have longer effects on play; as a player in a megadungeon, if I can deduce the general forces shaping the dungeon I become better able to survive it indefinitely.
I definitely share your preference for abduction -- most of this came from me trying to articulate why I like certain games and why certain tools are more useful than others when I prep scenarios.
I really like the short-term vs. long-term distinction. It comports with the tendency for storygames to favor one-shots and games with limited scope, vs. the sometimes-realized promise of OSR games lasting for years and years. And the megadungeon example is perfect -- using abduction to figure out underlying patterns in the map or encounter table or history is part of mastering the scenario.

