D&D General How much control do DMs need?

[clearstream]

And how is this any different than the DM creating a great game using D&D(photoshop) or some other system(different photo program)?

One way would be if one conjectured that the tool in question was not suitable or got in the way of successful play. However, this would come down to one's ability to define "successful play" for all cohorts. The impossibility of such a definition presents an insurmountable obstacle to the conclusions the poster is making.

 

[Lanefan]

Likewise I'm running the Dragonbane Misty Vale campaign; the published pregen PCs have backgrounds like "from the hot jungles of the south/frozen north/western cities/a Barony several days east" - none of which are on the campaign map.

In my eyes that's either a) in reference to a separately-sold setting, much like some classic adventures reference Greyhawk locations on the assumption you either already own it or will at some point, or b) a straight-up failure on the publisher's part.

If they're going to mention that stuff as part of the pre-gen character write-up then they need to give you some information about it (including at the very least where it is on the map) either in the module or elsewhere, so that if-when the character wants to go there you-as-DM have something to go on.

I don't see how that means that Free League haven't done their job,

I do, unless they've published their setting elsewhere and are merely referring to elements of it here.

or that I've failed as GM.

This one's not on you. You're relying on a published adventure and it has let you down.

 

[Lanefan]

No, that doesn't match my experience at all. In the vast majority of fantasy, space opera, pulp, horror etc etc campaigns, IME PC history, family, birthplace is irrelevant in play, and often a player demanding to bring it up would be seen as violating the table contract.

To the bolded: wtf? That would really be a new one on me.

To the rest: while PC family, birthplace etc. may not always become relevant in play, I'd still expect it to be available if only to inform my roleplaying: "You know, when I was growing up in Stonegard my sister used to make arrows like that." might introduce on the spot both the concept of Stonegard as a place and my sister as a person (and as a fletcher), but as player I'd greatly prefer to know about them ahead of time and where Stonegard is on the map etc..

There are exceptions like Game of Thrones & Pendragon, but these are pretty rare. Superheroes would be one genre where family etc does figure quite often.

And Star Wars. That whole saga revolves around one big and hugely dysfunctional family.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

My aim was to engage with the poster's analogy. What I think other posters are saying is that D&D is not a tool that can be operationalized in only one way like say a grout rake (I haven't yet thought of any uses for a grout rake other than raking grout... but who knows really.) The game text by design can be operationalized in many ways.

I'm saying you can put DW rules to work (is "operationalize" really needed?) in all the ways D&D rules can be, unless the work you wish to do is widely held to be bad. I don't mean style stuff. I mean (as I said before) "rocks fall, everyone dies." Running the game in bad faith.

That means that if I say "Isn't that exactly the same as D&D" it might not be. Because the operationalization of the D&D tool or game-as-artifact that I'm picturing and that will be productive of my D&D play or game-as-played might be different from that which they are picturing. Just as one cannot predict that a given use of Photoshop will produce a fauvist artwork. (And equally, just as failure to produce a fauvist artwork on this occasion doesn't make Photoshop a bad tool.)

Would that not mean truly no one can ever talk about gaming? Because no one can ever know if their D&D is anyone else's D&D, so any useful talk is impossible. Would seem to be a self-defeating claim if so, since it is, of its nature, talking about D&D.

I might have missed that part, but I suspect the whole thing is deeply confounded. Play by which way of grasping and upholding the rules. Reject which rules taking into account how one expects to grasp and uphold those?

One way I think about it is this. Suppose I have an ur-rule that says follow or don't follow other rules according to my principles. And suppose further that I haven't written down my principles and yet I feel like I know what they are. Feeling like one knows what ones principles are is to my observation pretty common, and yet if one asks questions it's quickly obvious that there are a lot of differing principles in play and folk don't clearly know what they are. They're fuzzy, flexible, complexly conditional. And suppose further that my ur-rule (the one bolded) says that what I should understand those other rules to entail also depends on my principles. Thus, overall I should grasp and uphold the rules according to my principles.

Most folk follow an ur-rule like that in their approach to TTRPG. Some game designers write out a list of principles they want to put folk in mind of. D&D doesn't. That directly and unavoidably implies that D&D resists common definition.

So, again: Does this mean we cannot ever talk about D&D, at all, in any way, at any time? Because the fact this forum is here seems to disprove that claim. Instead, we would have to go with something far weaker, like, "D&D is a bundle of things, and not everyone agrees on everything that is in it, but a majority agrees on most things in it, and for some specific things, nearly everyone agrees."

E.g., D&D is a cooperative game. Sure, you can run it for solo play, but we agree the rules were meant for groups. D&D is a roleplaying game. The DM controls the opposition, and needs to use some kind of "fairness" or the like. The DM has a lot of power, which means they have a burden to use it wisely, or else upset the group.

I could probably go on. It's not like the D&D bundle is some utterly ineffable mystery never to be understood by Mankind.

Dungeon World does get specific with its Principles (and Agendas, which are at a higher level still than Principles; Agendas are why you play at all, Principles are how you play, and Moves are the tools you use to do that.) When you tell people these Agendas, Principles, and Moves, and say "no, Dungeon World does not have a Rule Zero, you are supposed to follow the rules," they almost immediately react very badly. Often with bold assertions about how such a restrictive approach can't possibly produce good play because no system can be complete etc. etc. etc. Yet when you actually walk people through the process of applying the Agendas, following the Principles, and making Moves, it almost always ends with them saying, "That sounds just like D&D," in whatever phrase makes sense.

Hence why it seems like such a nontroversy. Getting one's feathers ruffled over the abstract sound of something, when actually using it is not only unobjectionable, but so familiar it leads to confused questions about how it differs at all.

 

[pemerton]

It's definitely prep.

Yes. This is obvious. One of the principles is Always Say What Your Prep Demands.

But this doesn't bear upon my assertion: Apart from the bare fact of being GM prep, there is almost nothing in common between prepping in AW and prepping in (say) Moldvay Basic. No maps. No "hidden board". No ways to render action outcomes certain or uncertain such that dice don't or do need to be rolled.

 

[pemerton]

I think you're describing a situation where you as GM have delegated certain powers, not one where you don't have power.

I generally delegate where I think it aids immersion rather than detracts. Eg a PC ought to know their own backstory, friends & family etc, so I think players should have a good amount of power to determine those elements. That's different from mutual story creation/storygaming.

How so?

In AW, the GM is expected to "ask questions and build on the answers". I don't see how what you describe with backstory is any different as a technique. It just seems that you limit the subject matter more than might be typical in AW.

 

[Aldarc]

If the players roll up a couple of Humans, a Dwarf, an Elf and a Hobbit for their starting characters I need to be able to pull out a map and show each player where - or at least what region or realm - their character is most likely from, based on its species and culture. Otherwise, I simply haven't done my job.

However, your need or, rather, desire to do so for your games doesn't mean that this is a universal requirement for play in all other games.

I'm vaguely reminded of comedian Aziz Ansari talking about his background as an Indian American born and raised in South Carolina. You may desire to pull out the map and point to India as where he is likely from and his culture, but he would likely tell you that he's from South Carolina and his native food is biscuits and gravy, shrimp and grits, and fried chicken.

 

[pemerton]

This still sounds like prep... just different prep from D&D.

Gee, I wonder if anyone posted this upthread:

Apart from the bare fact of being GM prep, there is almost nothing in common between prepping in AW and prepping in (say) Moldvay Basic. No maps. No "hidden board". No ways to render action outcomes certain or uncertain such that dice don't or do need to be rolled.

After disagreeing with me for post after post you now state your agreement as if you were right all along.

EDIT: Yeah, this too:

I mean, yes, DW calls it 'prep', but you would probably do the vast majority of it once, after the first session, and never again. It is NOT the preparation of a setting in which the action takes place, nor of deciding any of the parameters that would be set in a classic/trad/neo-trad/whatever D&D game. So its like using the word 'vehicle', yes horse buggies and porches are both vehicles, but that doesn't get you a whole lot...

 

[pemerton]

In AW 2nd edition there is a kind of radial map (called a "threat map" with the instruction "mark on the map the threat's location"), and it is marked to key certain threats to parts of it. It's very, very different map-and-key from classic D&D, but there is a prepped map that is keyed.

Here is the discussion of the 1st session worksheet (p 130 of the original version):

Fill up your 1st session worksheet. List the players’ characters in the center circle. Think of the space around them as a map, but with scarcity and lack instead of cardinal directions. As you name NPCs, place them on the map around the PCs, according to the fundamental scarcity that makes them a threat to the PCs.​

Here are the scarcities: Ambition, Hunger, Thirst, Envy, Ignorance, Despair, Fear, Decay.

That's not a map (the reason one has to be told to "think of it as a map" is because it [i[isn't[/i] a map. It doesn't have a key.

One could say it's a type of "mind map" or visually-arranged catalogue or index.

Then, from pp 132, 137:

[G]o back over it all. Pull it into its pieces. Solidify them into threats, following the rules [for threats and fronts] . . . Take these solid threats and build them up into fronts. Take the things you wonder about and rewrite them as stakes. Add countdowns and custom moves as you need. . . .

To create a front, grab a fronts sheet and:
• Choose a fundamental scarcity.
• Create 3 or 4 threats.
• Write its agenda / dark future.
• Write 2–4 stakes questions.
• List the front’s cast.
• Create the front’s overall countdowns.​

This is prep. It's not drawing and keying maps. It's not creating hidden information that the players aim to learn as part of play: the goal of AW play is not to discover the threats and fronts, nor to defeat the threats and fronts. It has nothing in common with prep that looks like Keep on the Borderlands, or The Sunless Citadel, or Dead Gods, or Expedition to the Demonweb Pits, or (as best I can tell) Curse of Strahd or Storm King's Thunder or like setting guides like The World of Greyhawk.

 

[pemerton]

How is this play loop not exploration. there is a map (The writeup of the island)... there is secret/hidden knowledge that you sometimes have to discover through asking, sometimes through a roll concerning the strife .

There is not a single map in the whole Agon book.

Here's an island I wrote up a little while ago for @chaochou's "Not the Iron GM" thread:

Kassos
A steep-sloped island of handicrafters and traders

Signs of the Gods
Demeter (Goddess of Law): Her sign is the seal - promises made and obligations kept.

Hephaistos (God of Crafting): His sign is a star-shaped brooch wrought out of tin, the imposition of form onto the chaos of the natural world.

Zeus (Lord of the Sky): A storm rages and torrential rain is falling as your sailors dock your vessel.

Arrival
Water flows through the streets of the town, sweeping away the market stalls and hand carts.

A crowd gathers at the edge of a cliff that overlooks the port - led by Dares, the priest of Zeus, they are going to throw a young man, Pythios, over the edge as a sacrifice.

A middle-aged woman, bedraggled in the downpour, recognises you as heroes and looks at you imploringly. She is Chryse, mother of Pythios.

You must choose swiftly: will you listen to Chryse (Arts & Oration to stop the crowd performing the sacrifice), or comfort her (Resolve & Spirit: if she wins, she hurls herself into the sea after her son), or join the crowd on the cliff (Resolve & Spirit: if the heroes win, the Strife Level is lowered by one)?

Trials
To learn the truth about Dares choice of sacrifice: he is in debt to Chryse (Craft & Reason in the temple records; Arts & Oration vs Dares).

To repair the drains and sewers (Craft & Reason; Arts & Oration my ad an advantage from willing townsfolk).

To offer a different sacrifice to Zeus to end the storm (Resolve & Spirit; if the storm continues, raise the strife level and repairing the drains and sewers becomes Perilous).

Battle
Will the heroes confront the wild cultists who dance in the under temple, praying for the sky and earth to swallow up the town and restore Kassos to its primeval state? Threats: the cultists kill Dares; more rain falls.

Or will the heroes topple Dares from his position of influence? Threats: Dares destroys the records in the temple; violence breaks out among the townsfolk as old debts are called in and new ones established in the struggle for power.

Characters
Dares, Priest of Zeus (d8). Cunning (d6). Pious (d8, and Sacred in his temple).
Chryse, Townswoman (d6). Devoted to her son (d8). Honest (d6).
Townsfolk (d6). Industrious (d6). Cooperative: Advantage on any endeavour where they work together.
Thesela, cult leader (d8). Zealous (d6). Hidden knife (d8 Perilous). Accompanied by her cultists, she is Epic.

Places
The buildings in the town have copper downpipes; the sewers and drains made of brick and clay pipe, into which these flow, are in disrepair.

The temple of Zeus contains records of all debts and promises.

The under temple, lit by torches, has brick walls but an earthen floor.

Special Rewards
Trade goods to fill the hold of your vessel.

Mysteries
Why does Zeus send rain? Is it at the supplication of the cultists? To punish Dares for allowing the temple to fall into debt?

Who are the cultists? Are they townsfolk who despise urban life? Are they descendants of the farmers and hunters who once ruled on Kassos? And do they have some hold over Dares such that he dare not drive them from the under temple?

For anyone who is not familiar with Agon, this write-up is just the same, in layout and style, as the islands in the rulebook. The mysteries are "questions . . . the characters and trials raise . . . to answer in play" (p 137).

I think anyone can read this and see that it is not very much like D&D prep. This is not how D&D setting and adventures are prepared. Here's just one illustration of the difference:

will you listen to Chryse (Arts & Oration to stop the crowd performing the sacrifice), or comfort her (Resolve & Spirit: if she wins, she hurls herself into the sea after her son)​

The situation is not presented with a map (of the cliffs, the temple, etc). Chryse is not statted out with attributes, skills, etc: her traits are Devoted to her son (d8) and Honest (d6). The situation is presented in ethical and moral terms.

Like I posted:

Another game with no lists of the D&D sort, and for which the prep is very different from D&D (for instance, no maps are prepared) is Agon. Unlike In A Wicked Age there are persistent PCs. But like In A Wicked Age a NPC or creature or inanimate obstacle (eg a mountain or a whirlpool) is mechanically just a dice pool.

In Agon the GM has very great control over where the PCs find themselves and hence what situation confronts them. But almost no control over the outcome of that situation, or what it means for the PCs' quest to return home from the Trojan War, mostly because at no point is that prep reference to establish consequences as it routinely is in D&D.

We can even see why there are no lists. Chryse, the Townsfolk, the other NPCs - these are unique individuals used to set up this particular island with its particular ethical and moral questions.

Other islands have their own focus, and hence their own NPCs with their own appropriate traits.