It's a fair question. The move Volley triggers whenever they take aim and shoot at an enemy. In the example, it seems like the player's description of the character's behavior satisfied that requirement. Seperately, the players definitely do not have the authority to decide that the orc has died, at least without the GM doing something like asking them a question about it.
It’s a conversation between the players and the GM—the GM tells the players what they see and hear in the world around them and the players say what their characters are thinking, feeling, and doing. Sometimes those descriptions will trigger a move—something that’ll cause everyone to stop and say “time to roll the dice to see what happens (Page 13).”
How can something cause everyone to stop and say "time to roll dice" if players can just describe the orc dying?
The players have it easy—they just say what their characters say, think, and do. You [the GM] have it a bit harder. You have to say everything else (Page 158).
Thanks for the answer.
I get it for the move triggers now, I think. Moves work with intention and action, both things the player controls. So that's okay.
But I don't quite know about authority though. I mean I see it more clearly now. But I think it is still weird at a deeper level. Authority is what prevents a player from saying: "The planet cracks and swallows the orc whole". But say a player puts a ladder against a barn wall to climb it. Nothing weird is going on. Barn not on fire, bull not rushing him and so forth... This does not trigger a move, and I don't know of many Mc's which would create one just for that occasion. Yet the player directly affected the world, which is supposedly the authority of the gm.
The answer would be that the player had authority over his character's action, which allowed him to describe them moving the ladder. This is a good answer I think. Yet it then obviously leads to a game where any action of the character described by the player automatically succeeds if it does not call for a move. And then what prevents the player from adding "I do the exact movement set required to put an arrow in the orc's eye" is the fact that this, by the rules, invokes a move that will bat the resolution of the action away from player authority. "Yes, however it means you aim which triggers Volley, which may cancel out your description by changing the situation directly
". This makes for a solid system.
Now what about specific actions that do not trigger a move? Or trigger a move that seems inappropriate? Say: "I put my hand together and hit at the planet's exact magico-telluric spot in order to crack it open". The player describes his actions. That is his right. He also has an intent, whose resolution is outside of his authority, but unfortunately he described in such a way that this intended result is a consequence of his action. So he should be able to add the cracking of the planet to the conversation. Obviously this should not be happening. I see two solutions:
First the M.c says "No". What this No means is that the player does not have the ability to position themselves fictionally to do this. An item may allow them to do so, but as is the character just cannot even describe this.
Second the M.c creates a move for the new situation, that enters into play right now. This is the "fun" solution but it breaks the game pace up quite a bit.
There is also another, weirder solution which is to create a move that encompasses these situations:Getting specific:
Whenever you get specific to achieve a precise outcome
the M.c decides on the stat that will be called for and judges it normal, difficult, crazy difficult or impossible. Roll +stat. If it is difficult, the player takes a -1 to the roll. If it's crazy difficult, the player takes a -2 to the roll. If it's impossible, treat the result as a 6-. On a 10+ you do it, and it's every bit as awesome as you thought it'd be. On a 7-9 you do it but there's a catch, the M.c offers you a worse outcome, a hard bargain or an ugly choice.