GM Authority (Edited For Clarity, Post #148)

[TwoSix]

It's not catered to much in roleplaying games because a game requires rules to set the limits of what is/is not allowed & how it can be done but probably the closest I can think of is fate where compels, stunts, &maneuvers can be leveraged socially to force the hand of other players/npcs but fate literally has a social combat stress track & set of consequences for it that works exactly like physical combat. Fate social stuff would have a hard time merging with d&d because the games are so different mechanically.

Sure, but I'm arguing that for a lot of players, the major rule in an RPG that's required is "State my case, and let the DM decide." OSR style play is like 80% freeform adjudication by the DM with no reference to mechanics, and that style of play is lionized by a whole lot of people. That major point of rules division in OSR style games seems to be "combat and spells" and "everything else", I'm just curious why there aren't more popular OSR type games where the entire set of rules is "combat and spells", and the everything else is left purely to DM adjudication.

 

[tetrasodium]

Sure, but I'm arguing that for a lot of players, the major rule in an RPG that's required is "State my case, and let the DM decide." OSR style play is like 80% freeform adjudication by the DM with no reference to mechanics, and that style of play is lionized by a whole lot of people. That major point of rules division in OSR style games seems to be "combat and spells" and "everything else", I'm just curious why there aren't more popular OSR type games where the entire set of rules is "combat and spells", and the everything else is left purely to DM adjudication.

Like this one from phb174?

It seems to cover exactly that.. what is that lacking for your (devil's advocate?) position

 

[Thomas Shey]

Dew class systems work for ASOIAF. There are like 6 "pillars" in the game at least with characters with many skills.

A DM who suggests a GOT campaign without listing a system designed for it game or a buttload of house rules gives me pause.

My point was that there are a number of non-class based systems that did not seem to lack the tools you were talking about, so I needed to see if I had to disagree with you. Since you were talking in the context of class based systems, I didn't need to do that.

 

[TwoSix]

Like this one from phb174?
View attachment 130165
It seems to cover exactly that.. what is that lacking for your (devil's advocate?) position

Because that's 180 degrees from "If the outcome is uncertain, the DM decides based on the strength of your ideas"? That rule is fine for physical checks, but I'm talking about divorcing mental and social procedures from any rules elements, because they shouldn't be necessary.

 

[macd21]

Dew class systems work for ASOIAF. There are like 6 "pillars" in the game at least with characters with many skills.

A DM who suggests a GOT campaign without listing a system designed for it game or a buttload of house rules gives me pause.

So assume the GM suggested a system designed for it. It’s irrelevant to the scenario the OP is asking about.

 

[tetrasodium]

Because that's 180 degrees from "If the outcome is uncertain, the DM decides based on the strength of your ideas"? That rule is fine for physical checks, but I'm talking about divorcing mental and social procedures from any rules elements, because they shouldn't be necessary.

"divorcing mental and social procedures from any rules elements, because they shouldn't be necessary."
I was about to ask "isn't that just larping?" but the wikipedia page for that starts out like this:

• A live action role-playing game (LARP) is a form of role-playing game where the participants physically portray their characters.[1] The players pursue goals within a fictional settingrepresented by the real world while interacting with each other in character.
  • Ok... so far pretty smilar to d&d and most other ttrpgs
• The outcome of player actions may be mediated by game rules or determined by consensus among players. Event arrangers called gamemastersdecide the setting and rules to be used and facilitate play.
  • Oops... even larping(!!!!!!) has game rules and game masters

You seem to be describing freeform roleplay or a time honored tradition frequently known as "writing a work of fiction".. how is this hypothetical thing you are talking about different from those when even larping seems to be too heavy on rules & the control of a GM for it?
edit: are you really suggesting that social interactions should be treated like calvinball in a ttrpg?

 

[TwoSix]

"divorcing mental and social procedures from any rules elements, because they shouldn't be necessary."
I was about to ask "isn't that just larping?" but the wikipedia page for that starts out like this:

• A live action role-playing game (LARP) is a form of role-playing game where the participants physically portray their characters.[1] The players pursue goals within a fictional settingrepresented by the real world while interacting with each other in character.
  • Ok... so far pretty smilar to d&d and most other ttrpgs
• The outcome of player actions may be mediated by game rules or determined by consensus among players. Event arrangers called gamemastersdecide the setting and rules to be used and facilitate play.
  • Oops... even larping(!!!!!!) has game rules and game masters

You seem to be describing freeform roleplay or a time honored tradition frequently known as "writing a work of fiction".. how is this hypothetical thing you are talking about different from those when even larping seems to be too heavy on rules & the control of a GM for it?
edit: are you really suggesting that social interactions should be treated like calvinball in a ttrpg?

I feel like you're not comprehending my argument.

1) This is not my preference. I actually favor stronger narrative controls, generally. I'm discussing a hypothetical.

2) What I'm describing is why there is need to commit any sort of player resources (stat points, skill allocations, etc.) in a game where the desired type of play is freeform roleplaying, specifically freeform in the social and mental spheres. Basically, why is Charisma even a thing in OSR style play, when the goal of play is skilled play adjudicated by the DM's judgments of reasonableness?

 

[Thomas Shey]

2) What I'm describing is why there is need to commit any sort of player resources (stat points, skill allocations, etc.) in a game where the desired type of play is freeform roleplaying, specifically freeform in the social and mental spheres. Basically, why is Charisma even a thing in OSR style play, when the goal of play is skilled play adjudicated by the DM's judgments of reasonableness?

Well, traditionally because the value provided the GM for some information for deterministic values the game had (followers and such). The fact most of those elements haven't been a significant element even in most OSR games for decades does indicate that they aren't serving anything but an advisory function in games that don't want anything to do with social mechanics, though.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

What class is Sansa Stark?

Depends, are we playing literally in that world? Then, yes, use the RPG made for that, or perhaps use the classes from Adventures In Middle Earth.

But if someone tells me they want to play a D&D game Inspired by ASoIaF, I’m going to assume there are non-human PCs and at least a little more magic than is shown in the books or tv show, and that it is a world inspired by that franchise, not its world as such.

In which case, probably Bard, possibly @MoonSong ’s (IIRC) Noble they wrote for ENWorld, possibly the AIME Sage.

 

[Imaculata]

If I want to run a setting that excludes elves, the entire group should agree that they want to play such a campaign first. Once that is agreed upon, character creation should be no issue. So I side with neither.