D&D 5E How do you define “mother may I” in relation to D&D 5E?

[Snarf Zagyg]

I’m not sure - who is arguing for Mother May I as a description of their own style?

The phrase is only being used negatively near as I can tell. It’s adjacent to legit styles, but those aren’t being called MMI by proponents of those styles. They have other, non-perjorative names for what they do.

Well, yes. But that's the point I've been making.

If you play FKR (as I do) you don't talk about MMI. Because that's a term used by people that don't play that.

There are all sorts of ways to be a bad DM (or a bad player). I don't find MMI to be a useful term, especially as it is almost exclusively used by people that don't play a particular style to disparage that style.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Well, yes. But that's the point I've been making.

If you play FKR (as I do) you don't talk about MMI. Because that's a term used by people that don't play that.

There are all sorts of ways to be a bad DM (or a bad player). I don't find MMI to be a useful term, especially as it is almost exclusively used by people that don't play a particular style to disparage that style.

To me it’s like railroading - it’s more specific than just “bad dming” but is a subset thereof.

And if a game is described as having MMI we only know it’s bad dming if we are willing to assume the player was definitely being reasonable and expectations were clear all around- something that doesn’t always happen. So, take it with a tablespoon of salt.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

To me it’s like railroading - it’s more specific than just “bad dming” but is a subset thereof.

And if a game is described as having MMI we only know it’s bad dming if we are willing to assume the player was definitely being reasonable and expectations were clear all around- something that doesn’t always happen. So, take it with a tablespoon of salt.

Oh, railroading.

I am sure you will get a LOT of agreement about whether that's bad DMing (or what it even means) when you use that term.

All Aboard the Invisible Railroad!

What if I told you it was possible to lock your players on a tight railroad, but make them think every decision they made mattered? Picture courtesy of Pixabay. While this may sound like the evil GM speaking, I have my reasons. Firstly, not every GM has time to craft a massive campaign. There...

www.enworld.org

 

[Giant Octopodes]

Well, yes. But that's the point I've been making.

If you play FKR (as I do) you don't talk about MMI. Because that's a term used by people that don't play that.

There are all sorts of ways to be a bad DM (or a bad player). I don't find MMI to be a useful term, especially as it is almost exclusively used by people that don't play a particular style to disparage that style.

Only really addressing the point in bold, but I just want to point out - as someone with Zero familiarity with the term, from the term "Mother May I" I could instantly tell:
- It dealt with needing 'permission' to do things.
- Within the context of a D&D forum, it almost certainly referred to issues with the DM's handling of the game (as they wouldn't need permission from the players).
- It is being seen in a negative light.

Just saying, that is a LOT of information conveyed in a term, because it's largely self-descriptive. Now, you don't need the information, as you're already familiar with it, so I can see how it would not be useful to you. However, as someone coming in fresh to the discussion, if you were instead to use the term FKR or "Free Kriegsspiel Revolution", unless I happened to know German (which I do but most don't), the term would convey nothing of use to me.

Now, I can see how you would have concerns over the negative connotation coloring the conversation, and I can understand the challenges associated with folks conflating the specific complaints and negative comments associated with "MMI" with an entire playstyle. But as an outsider, I find it a much more useful term than FKR, for the same reasons that "Centigrade" is an infinitely superior name to the temperature system than "Celsius" is.

 

[Raunalyn]

Well, let's see ... you literally defined an entire gaming style later in your post as Mother May I. Did you notice that?

Here-



Except .... it wasn't jettisoned from the game. There is a reason that there is this entire "OSR" thing. Or, for that matter, "FKR."

And that's the issue- you just literally and unknowingly disparaged the way a LOT of people play. Because you have accepted this term- which was first used, AFAIK, (IRONY ALERT) by Mike Mearls and became popularized among a certain set of gamers that did not play D&D.

Which is the point I was making. Use the term other people use to describe the games they are playing. Don't use a term that was invented as a pejorative.

Ah! I see you two have met...

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Only really addressing the point in bold, but I just want to point out - as someone with Zero familiarity with the term, from the term "Mother May I" I could instantly tell:
- It dealt with needing 'permission' to do things.
- Within the context of a D&D forum, it almost certainly referred to issues with the DM's handling of the game (as they wouldn't need permission from the players).
- It is being seen in a negative light.

Just saying, that is a LOT of information conveyed in a term, because it's largely self-descriptive. Now, you don't need the information, as you're already familiar with it, so I can see how it would not be useful to you. However, as someone coming in fresh to the discussion, if you were instead to use the term FKR or "Free Kriegsspiel Revolution", unless I happened to know German (which I do but most don't), the term would convey nothing of use to me.

Now, I can see how you would have concerns over the negative connotation coloring the conversation, and I can understand the challenges associated with folks conflating the specific complaints and negative comments associated with "MMI" with an entire playstyle. But as an outsider, I find it a much more useful term than FKR, for the same reasons that "Centigrade" is an infinitely superior name to the temperature system than "Celsius" is.

So let's unpack this a little.

Let's start with your third point.

"It is being seen in a negative light."

That's what I have repeatedly saying. Now, if you listen to some of the people on this thread (that I do not wish to summon), they will claim that this is just a neutral term. "Just calling it like it is."

That is wrong. You acknowledge that. I'll quote @payn who correctly stated the issue on the first page-

Like many of these derogatory remarks, they do contain legit concepts. Its just a very clear flag planting of where the person's line in the sand is. My advice is to either ignore the insult and focus on the example and discussion, or just ignore the comment if it seems like a position stand in place of any genuine interest of discussion.

That's what the issue is. I brought up FKR because it's a relatively "pure" example - but the actual OP (and primary usage) of MMI has nothing to do with FKR, which is far too niche. Instead, it's about "rulings not rules" in 5e or OSR play.*

Look, if I describe games that have a lot of rules as "Mindless Button Pushing," then you could say that (to quote you)-
- It dealt with not wanting 'permission' to do things.
- Within the context of a D&D forum, it almost certainly referred to issues with the players being able to rely on the rules to get pre-determined outcomes.
- It is being seen in a negative light.

Right? Simple. But the third point is the most important. If someone uses that term, I know that they are using a derogatory remark, and are planting a very clear flag as to what their preferred style of play is. It's probably not worth engaging with them substantively.

Same with MMI. People have preferences- and there are advantages and disadvantages to rulings and rules, which has been a push-pull that predates 5e, predates D&D, and goes back to the original Kriegsspiel / Free Kriegsspiel split. There isn't a "right" answer- just relative preferences for the things that are provided by it.


*Again, OSR play became popular during 3e as a reaction to the abundance of rules.

 

[Iosue]

Just as an aside, when Mike Mearls coined the term “mother-may-I” in terms of RPGs, he was not referring to play styles or even necessarily design styles, but to in-game abilities. Specifically, 3.5 feats that presumed a grid being used in TotM, or things like the Ranger’s favored enemy, which only works if the DM provides the opportunity.

The original LiveJournal post has been lost to the ether, but I was able to track down this RPG.net post that quotes the relative section. It certainly represents the zeitgeist of that period, when the drawbacks to 3.5’s design was the hot topic.

 

[Giant Octopodes]

-snip-

Right, I freely acknowledge it conveys a negative connotation. FWIW I personally would not get the presented connotation from "Mindless Button Pushing", though I recognize what you're getting at. To me that would moreso imply spamming the same action repeatedly, and absent other context I might assume it was due to limited options or at least limited viable options being presented. Not trying to tangent just pointing out not everyone reads into things the same way.

Regardless, I was not speaking to whether or not that should be the term used, I was just speaking to whether or not the term is useful. I will say, the descriptions provided of the specific concerns associated with MMI, which intuitively track with my understanding of the term, are NOT disparaging statements about a playstyle, but rather specific concerns about adjudication. As you've already indicated (correctly, in my view), "Adversarial or bad DMing can exist in any type of game. And yes, it can exist even when there are pre-agreed-upon rules!", so given that, the assumption that it is not about specific complaints associated with specific instances of bad, adversarial DMing and instead is "a very clear flag as to what their preferred style of play is", does not to me seem to be fair or accurate, at least not within the context of this discussion.

 

[tetrasodium]

Just as an aside, when Mike Mearls coined the term “mother-may-I” in terms of RPGs, he was not referring to play styles or even necessarily design styles, but to in-game abilities. Specifically, 3.5 feats that presumed a grid being used in TotM, or things like the Ranger’s favored enemy, which only works if the DM provides the opportunity.

The original LiveJournal post has been lost to the ether, but I was able to track down this RPG.net post that quotes the relative section. It certainly represents the zeitgeist of that period, when the drawbacks to 3.5’s design was the hot topic.

Looks like it's archived here There's quite the undercurrent of distrust of the GM having any power in it & 5e ensures that the players don't need anything from the gm in so many ways that you can really see the results.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

the assumption that it is not about specific complaints associated with specific instances of bad, adversarial DMing and instead is "a very clear flag as to what their preferred style of play is", does not to me seem to be fair or accurate, at least not within the context of this discussion.

I don't think further elaboration is fruitful.

You agree that the phrase has a negative connotation.

There have been repeated posts from multiple people from the first page until my series of posts explaining, ad nauseum, that this is a term that people who engage in a playing style do not use to describe the style that they are using. Instead, it is used by people who are disparaging it.

And your reaction is, despite being told this, is ... roughly, "Okay. I already said it was a negative phrase. And I see that people don't like it being used to describe them. But hey, I'm going to keep using it ... and I'm going to say it's unfair for people to complain about us using it to describe them! Do you know who the real ra..." Ahem.

I really don't think you want to do that.