Is "GM Agency" A Thing?

[Emberashh]

Snark aside, the issue of a GM rambling about stuff that may not actually be necessarily revelant is really more an issue of style and expectation.

Games that hinge around these kinds of open-world sandboxes have to both be pitched and run in a way that makes the use of background details apparent in their use, but flexible enough to come into focus.

For instance, take this Encounter tool I came up with for my game: Click here

As part of this tool, I have two different kinds of Worldbuilding encounters between Lore and Flavor. These are intentioned to provide a structured way to introduce random background details about the world, and the extent to which they're used for that is left up to the GM.

A common example I use though is a dragon flying around in the distance. If upon presenting this the PCs decide they're going to go hunt that Dragon down, then so be it! If they're that confident they can take on a Dragon, then by all means.

This doesn't mean I intended them to do that. The only reason the encounter appears is just because time keeps ticking on in the game and things keep happening (and this particular encounter type, a Flavor encounter, is meant to just add some minor *but ubpredictavle worldbuilding flavor) , and while the PCs actions do have some direct influence over the possibility that these Encounters will directly impact them (regardless of their choices), the Encounters do not exist only for the sake of the PCs.

They exist to flesh out the world and better emulate the idea that the world doesn't pause while the PCs sit around and crack fart jokes.

Plus, they also exist to mechanically represent something Open-Worlds need in terms of points of interest. While one can simply write and forcibly introduce such POI's, its much better when the GM's authorship is shared with the system, because it not only helps (at least through my games use of the Tension pool as a core mechanic) integrate these encounters with the players actions, but also enhances the fun for the GM as they'll never know the circumstances of how each encounter will come into play, even if they know the general bounds of each one.

After all, the same encounter can be very different depending on the context it happens in.

An encounter with a couple of low level goblins may not be anything to worry about in any given situation, but when the party is in the middle of climbing a narrow mountain pass, just as a Blizzard rolls in, giving the Goblins a terrible advantage as they disappear in the snowy wind, oh, how the circumstances change.

And again, this could be written ahead of time with all of these elements.

But what is more interesting? Pre-writing an encounter down to its bones, or having the encounter emerge organically as you play?

Story games try to make this kind of emergence happen through human authorship but it seldom works in the same way systemic authorship does, and ultimately, by doing that you're ultimately trying to make a game of writing, rather than making a game of dungeons and dragons.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The point being that you do feel it’s a deal breaker inside of DnD.

For me personally, yes.

 

[Emberashh]

games are surprisingly bland. The effort for Leading Edge Games' Phoenix Command RPG, due to the number of rolls involved, the law of averages renders it usually less surprising than D&D. Likewise, the law of averages makes WEG d6 less surprising in outcomes than Savage Worlds.

Oh absolutely. Complexity isn't the only ingredient here, but I would say that predictability in math isn't necessarily what Im getting at, particularly because there has to be some measure of it to allow for Progression to be meaningful.

More predictable math can also be leveraged to make the game easier to run; as Ive found by allowing my game's roll modifiers to climb higher than a 1d20, the intent being to make high level play less complex to run and the Progression to that level more meaningful, as this capability exists alongside casual dragon suplexing. And DCs that climb over twice the value of the d20.

This is actually why Ive taken such a keen interest in integration and ensuring mechanical interactivity in the gameworld, because I need to support a higher level of power fantasy than most other games are willing to try for.

 

[aramis erak]

And before the inevitable "but viking hat GM!": save it. It's a distraction. Don't play with that guy. Play with a GM that wants you to drive the story.

For a still significant minority, that means a choice of (1) quitting the hobby or (2) playing online with strangers.

And largely, the latter is psychologically troubling for many; worse, given how frequent neurodivergent disorders appear in gamers. And let's not forget that it's often simply outside the reach of many novices.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Then … I know this is controversial…. Don’t use it?

There’s nothing wrong with trad play. It certainly works. I cannot deny that.

By why complain about including non-trad play in DnD as well?

Because there are plenty of non-trad games already, and more on the way? I don't see you advocating for trad play in Blades in the Dark, or Marvel Heroic, or Fate. Why does D&D need these things? Or if you want to combine the two, why not support a D&D adjacent game that allows for non-trad play. Does Dungeon World count because of the themes? Maybe that new thing Critical Role is making.

 

[Hussar]

So you now care about who authors the fiction, not just who says it aloud? Or are there different standards for GMs and players for some reason?

Who’s talking about now?

The point has ALWAYS been about who authors the fiction. At least that’s always been my point. Allowing the players to take an active role in authoring the fiction imo leads to greater player engagement with the campaign.

Counter arguments about allowing this will give players some sort of advantage ignores all the games where this is done and really illustrates a contempt for players. Only the dm can be trusted to author the fiction is a pretty standard argument for trad play that I do not find compelling.

 

[Micah Sweet]

For a still significant minority, that means a choice of (1) quitting the hobby or (2) playing online with strangers.

And largely, the latter is psychologically troubling for many; worse, given how frequent neurodivergent disorders appear in gamers. And let's not forget that it's often simply outside the reach of many novices.

I know there are difficulties, but the answer can't be, "change the rules so the DM has to run the game your way". That's no more fair than what the viking hat guy is doing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Who’s talking about now?

The point has ALWAYS been about who authors the fiction. At least that’s always been my point. Allowing the players to take an active role in authoring the fiction imo leads to greater player engagement with the campaign.

Counter arguments about allowing this will give players some sort of advantage ignores all the games where this is done and really illustrates a contempt for players. Only the dm can be trusted to author the fiction is a pretty standard argument for trad play that I do not find compelling.

Are you claiming that you haven't been illustrating contempt for DMs this whole time? That's what I see.

 

[bloodtide]

It's all illusion. There is no real living breathing world. The goal is to make the events of play seem reasonable and plausible in a way that fits with what's been established.

The living world is an Artificial Reality Simulation. Not a game illusion. The DM is making an effort to make the game play "just like reality.

An Improv game or an Interactive game is providing an illusion. Each time the characters walk into town the DM rolls on the Town Events table to give an illusion that something is going on in the town. Like a video game wee you walk past the same NPC...forever walking by saying "oh my wife is cooking hot dogs for dinner tonight"

I'm not saying that nothing like a war in a far off land should ever be mentioned. I'm just saying that the whole idea of rumors is usually more about introducing plot hooks more than it is about portraying a living breathing world.

This is only if your thinking of everything has a basic game. In a basic game, everything a DM says is a Plot Hook. The same way things said by NPCs in video games are plot hooks. That NPC stuck on the side of the road forever always says "legends says only the red key can open the red door and the red key is in Farbottom Swamp".

But if it keeps coming up even if they're trying to find out news about something else?

Or if the stakes are significant enough that no matter where they go, it's gonna come up? Yeah, these are ways the GM is trying to steer things back to their story.

Again, this is basic game thinking: anything the DM/NPCs say is a plot hook....cue video game music...doo boo boo ddo boo doo.

In the Living Game all the news is there to make the game come alive. Not for the players to take 'plot hook A'.

So when I hear "the party goes into a bar to hear rumors" I read that as "Players going to the GM for plot hooks"... and that doesn't scream living world to me.

I agree. Though most living world games will ignore this Video Game Interactive action.

Few people have offered anything like this during the discussion. Do you have any other examples you can think of that have come up in actual play?

Well, this goes into the whole discussion of how does the DM run the game.....that's like a whole other thread.

"I want it to be that way" would, I expect, be a very popular answer. Likely right after "That's the way I think it would go."

This depends on if the DM is good or bad at what they do.

 

[Emberashh]

Are you claiming that you haven't been illustrating contempt for DMs this whole time? That's what I see.

I think the fact that he doesn't recognize that authorship in trad games is a three way relationship between the GM, the Players, and the System itself is illustrative of the divide here.

In fact, I would actually argue that many games that claim to be more equitable in that relationship are actually just cannibalizing the system and giving GMs a greater weight on the fiction than they already had, whilst may be giving some to Players too.

And as said previously, I think its an effort born in trying to fix bad (dissonant) gameplay by throwing it out rather than through any actual fix.