D&D General Player-generated fiction in D&D

[Umbran]

That is a version of Fate right? I've only been fortunate to play Fate a handful of times.

No, Cortex Plus is not a version of Fate. Fate came earlier, and you are right, its Compels are an iconic version of this mechanic.

Cortex has some similar mechanics, and some of them even take the GM out of the loop - the player can often choose to put a low die into a pool (and thereby reduce their chances of success) to get a Plot Point that they can spend later.

 

[FrozenNorth]

This is true, but this also attracts the wrong sort of player.

A good player players the game.

A bad player alters game reality on a whim and demands the DM agree and always say "yes player". And you really don't want to game with that sort of person.

The facts strongly suggest you are wrong. You do not play in this style, yet you have many, many posts complaining about “bad players”.

Meanwhile, many of the posters with a more “player-creative style”, @Manbearcat , @pemerton and @BookTenTiger have given multiple example of engaged players having fun.

One possible conclusion is that an approach that empowers players leads to engaged proactive players, and that your approach leads to players that don’t care very much about the game.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Doesn’t a good DM learn to say no?
Internal consistency is important.

Sorry this is a bit late, was combing back through the thread and felt I should reply.

In my experience, a good DM needs to learn how to say "yes" much more than they need to learn how to say "no."

Most folks, when they take up the DM seat, are not total rubes. They've played the game for a while before DMing. They know what it means to be a player searching for an advantage, or an exploit, depending on how one views the tactics used. Even if they don't do that sort of thing themselves, they've almost surely seen it from someone else. DM skepticism is alive and well, particularly in this vaunted age of "DM empowerment" which basically just means "do whatever you want, whenever you want, for as long as you want, and give your players the proverbial middle finger if they don't like it; you aren't required to do anything more or different, and if players complain, they're being toxic and horrible and ruining your beautiful game." Beyond that, we're still plagued by old favorites like DMs not understanding iterative probability (that old chestnut, e.g. "you have to roll Hide and Move Silently every round you're inside," which merely guarantees eventual failure), or having deeply mistaken beliefs about what is physically possible IRL let alone in a fantasy setting where being angry enough can let you chokeslam dragons.

What DMs actually need--a skill they almost never start with, but which is critical to develop--is learning how to say "yes" well. Saying no is easy; you just shut down whatever the person is trying to do. Saying yes is significantly more difficult, because there are grades of yes. No is no; but "yes" can be "yes, absolutely 100%", or "sure, but with this tweak", or "how about this, which does the same thing a different way?", or "yes, but it won't work the way you think", or "yes, and this other consequence too," or "yes, but it will take time/effort/resources/etc.", or...

The only variation on "no" is "no, but..." which is, IMO, actually a way of saying yes--because the "but" cashes out as, "well you can't have that very specific thing, but this is something I'm happy to say yes about which is close to what you wanted."

Learning how to say "yes, but..."/"yes, and..." is a crucial skill that many DMs take a very long time to develop. I find very, very few DMs need to learn how to say a flat "no", and as noted, "no, but..." is IMO actually saying "yes" in disguise.

 

[Eric V]

So it's not D&D, but in our 13th Age game, the use of Icon Relationships is a hard-wired mechanic in the game for the PCs to generate fiction (and more) into the ongoing narrative.

Mechanically, the necromancer in our game once used an Icon Die with the Lich Kiing to capture some of the essence of their defeated shadow dragon opponent into an onyx gem. Now, there's no spell Capture Essence, but this is apparently something he can do (sometimes...sometimes he doesn't have an Icon Die with the Lich King to spend!). What does it mean that he's carrying around some part of the essence of Shadow Dragon? It means as a GM, I have very fertile ground for further adventures, cryptic hints, etc. Can't imagine why, as a GM, I'd say no to something like that.

Another used his Icon Die with the Prince of Shadows to spontaneously come up with an NPC on the spot, to get them out of a jam: "Before I answer the guard, my old high school chum, Willard, recognizes me from across the bar and comes over to say hi. He's a minor noble, and the guards don't want to risk offense, so they let me go." For some GMs, that might seem like cheating, but for me, I have a new NPC to play with, as well as a noble who is now owed a favour by the PC. There's nothing but upside here, and again, I can't imagine wanting to say no to it.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Sorry this is a bit late, was combing back through the thread and felt I should reply.

In my experience, a good DM needs to learn how to say "yes" much more than they need to learn how to say "no."

Most folks, when they take up the DM seat, are not total rubes. They've played the game for a while before DMing. They know what it means to be a player searching for an advantage, or an exploit, depending on how one views the tactics used. Even if they don't do that sort of thing themselves, they've almost surely seen it from someone else. DM skepticism is alive and well, particularly in this vaunted age of "DM empowerment" which basically just means "do whatever you want, whenever you want, for as long as you want, and give your players the proverbial middle finger if they don't like it; you aren't required to do anything more or different, and if players complain, they're being toxic and horrible and ruining your beautiful game." Beyond that, we're still plagued by old favorites like DMs not understanding iterative probability (that old chestnut, e.g. "you have to roll Hide and Move Silently every round you're inside," which merely guarantees eventual failure), or having deeply mistaken beliefs about what is physically possible IRL let alone in a fantasy setting where being angry enough can let you chokeslam dragons.

What DMs actually need--a skill they almost never start with, but which is critical to develop--is learning how to say "yes" well. Saying no is easy; you just shut down whatever the person is trying to do. Saying yes is significantly more difficult, because there are grades of yes. No is no; but "yes" can be "yes, absolutely 100%", or "sure, but with this tweak", or "how about this, which does the same thing a different way?", or "yes, but it won't work the way you think", or "yes, and this other consequence too," or "yes, but it will take time/effort/resources/etc.", or...

The only variation on "no" is "no, but..." which is, IMO, actually a way of saying yes--because the "but" cashes out as, "well you can't have that very specific thing, but this is something I'm happy to say yes about which is close to what you wanted."

Learning how to say "yes, but..."/"yes, and..." is a crucial skill that many DMs take a very long time to develop. I find very, very few DMs need to learn how to say a flat "no", and as noted, "no, but..." is IMO actually saying "yes" in disguise.

i'm sure all those responses have their place, but i think by that same merit so does a plain 'no', sometimes you simply fail, sometimes your idea wasn't a valid one.

 

[Eric V]

i'm sure all those responses have their place, but i think by that same merit so does a plain 'no', sometimes you simply fail, sometimes your idea wasn't a valid one.

Fail at what, exactly?

EDIT: Ok, since @CreamCloud0 edited their post to include "sometimes your idea wasn't a valid one." I understand what they're trying to say now. It brings up the question about who determines validity, and I suspect I know what their answer would be, but that's another topic.

 

[KYRON45]

Sorry this is a bit late, was combing back through the thread and felt I should reply.

In my experience, a good DM needs to learn how to say "yes" much more than they need to learn how to say "no."

Most folks, when they take up the DM seat, are not total rubes. They've played the game for a while before DMing. They know what it means to be a player searching for an advantage, or an exploit, depending on how one views the tactics used. Even if they don't do that sort of thing themselves, they've almost surely seen it from someone else. DM skepticism is alive and well, particularly in this vaunted age of "DM empowerment" which basically just means "do whatever you want, whenever you want, for as long as you want, and give your players the proverbial middle finger if they don't like it; you aren't required to do anything more or different, and if players complain, they're being toxic and horrible and ruining your beautiful game." Beyond that, we're still plagued by old favorites like DMs not understanding iterative probability (that old chestnut, e.g. "you have to roll Hide and Move Silently every round you're inside," which merely guarantees eventual failure), or having deeply mistaken beliefs about what is physically possible IRL let alone in a fantasy setting where being angry enough can let you chokeslam dragons.

What DMs actually need--a skill they almost never start with, but which is critical to develop--is learning how to say "yes" well. Saying no is easy; you just shut down whatever the person is trying to do. Saying yes is significantly more difficult, because there are grades of yes. No is no; but "yes" can be "yes, absolutely 100%", or "sure, but with this tweak", or "how about this, which does the same thing a different way?", or "yes, but it won't work the way you think", or "yes, and this other consequence too," or "yes, but it will take time/effort/resources/etc.", or...

The only variation on "no" is "no, but..." which is, IMO, actually a way of saying yes--because the "but" cashes out as, "well you can't have that very specific thing, but this is something I'm happy to say yes about which is close to what you wanted."

Learning how to say "yes, but..."/"yes, and..." is a crucial skill that many DMs take a very long time to develop. I find very, very few DMs need to learn how to say a flat "no", and as noted, "no, but..." is IMO actually saying "yes" in disguise.

Clearly we disagree.

 

[KYRON45]

Fail at what, exactly?

You would be failing whatever it was you were trying to do I imagine.

 

[Umbran]

If all you want is positives you should make this a (+) thread.

Mod Note:

Whether there is a (+) on the thread title or not, you, as a fellow poster, should still show a little consideration for how much opposing opinion you really ought to be injecting into a discussion.

Lack of a (+) does not absolve you of all responsibility. Please stop hiding behind that.

On the other hand I don't think D&D is really the right game for that kind of game or reward system.

And it is fine if you don't think D&D is the right system (for you) to play that sort of game. It is fine for you to say so, at least briefly.

But, given that, continuing to hammer on it 20 pages later is no longer seemly.

Learn to moderate yourself. But for now, I'll do it for you...

 

[CreamCloud0]

Fail at what, exactly?

at whatever they wanted to attempt.