GMing: What If We Say "Yes" To Everything?

[pemerton]

Which is literally "asking the GM stuff". A player cannot do anything in a traditional RPG without going through the GM. I am not sure what is confusing about that.

If the DM does a sufficient job describing the environment, then the players can simply make action declarations for what their PC is attempting to accomplish in the scene and how they’re going about it. Then the DM adjudicates accordingly. No questions needed in the conversation.

My perspective here is closer to @Swarmkeeper. Rolemaster may be a "traditional" RPG, but player action declarations are not a request for permission or information from the GM. They are the players invoking the resolution process, which - in Rolemaster - is generally defined by the table or similar sub-system for the skill that the character is using.

I was presupposing a traditional RPG with a GM who usually has full authorial control.

I think this is a contentious characterisation of many RPGs. Eg it is not how Traveller 1977 works; later versions changed the game in this direction, but still contained player-facing resolution sub-systems.

 

[Bohandas]

Just a thought experiment:

What if for a new campaign or just a one shot, the GM said "Yes" to literally everything the players asked or wanted to do. Not "Yes, but," but just "yes, you can do/be/use that."

Normally, the GM hedges, using die rolls or negotiation to craft play and control pacing, and sometimes to maintain a level of control over the world and the characters. What would a game look like where the GM gave up even a hint of control and just narrated the results of the PCs' choices and successful actions?

I think it would look a lot like AI Dungeon

 

[clearstream]

Maybe I’m being overly literal here but… in such a game questions would simply not be necessary. The piano is there if the player wants it to be and declares it to be so.

I observed something similar up thread, but...

the agreed upon boundaries of the game -- rules, setting and milieu -- would have to be respected by all.

What if someone goes off-piste? No one can say "no" to them, so the boundaries must expand.

 

[aramis erak]

Right. The question exists because of framing: the GM saying yes. This is only because I was presupposing a traditional RPG with a GM who usually has full authorial control. I don't wantbto eliminate the GM because I am still assuming the GM frames scenes and does other GM stuff, but effectively you are right.

I think this is a contentious characterisation of many RPGs. Eg it is not how Traveller 1977 works; later versions changed the game in this direction, but still contained player-facing resolution sub-systems.

Nor Traveller-81, -82 (TTB), 83 (ST), 87 (MT)...
Nor, for that matter, any game I've run, save AD&D...
... and in AD&D it's only true in the most jaundiced view of the rules

Yes. One thing that came up early is the realization that the agreed upon boundaries of the game -- rules, setting and milieu -- would have to be respected by all.

Which is something I've never had happen with any group I've run for, at least not past about 3 sessions, tho' my sunday group is getting better about staying close if they have a grip on the genre. If they don't, they're groping for the edges of what is allowed.
They seem to enjoy exploring the bounds of the subgenre of the game at play.

 

[Reynard]

My perspective here is closer to @Swarmkeeper. Rolemaster may be a "traditional" RPG, but player action declarations are not a request for permission or information from the GM. They are the players invoking the resolution process, which - in Rolemaster - is generally defined by the table or similar sub-system for the skill that the character is using.

I think this is a contentious characterisation of many RPGs. Eg it is not how Traveller 1977 works; later versions changed the game in this direction, but still contained player-facing resolution sub-systems.

Just because the resolution system is player facing doesn't mean the player doesn't need the GM in order to invoke it.

Can you explain the method a Traveller player can do something in the fiction without the GM?

 

[aramis erak]

Just because the resolution system is player facing doesn't mean the player doesn't need the GM in order to invoke it.

Can you explain the method a Traveller player can do something in the fiction without the GM?

to quote from Classic Traveller

PLAYING THE GAME
There are three basic ways to play Traveller: solitaire, scenario, and campaign. Any of these three may be unsupervised (that is, without a referee; the players themselves administer the rules and manipulate the situation). Recommended instead is the refereed game, where a separate player runs the situation and administers the rules.

It then goes on to discuss solitaire play, standalone scenarios, and campaign play.
The traveller Referee is axiomatically not empowered to be the sole authority, but to fairly decide situations.

 

[pemerton]

Just because the resolution system is player facing doesn't mean the player doesn't need the GM in order to invoke it.

Can you explain the method a Traveller player can do something in the fiction without the GM?

In Traveller (1977), when a player declares that their starship makes a jump, there are various throws to be made (to determine if a misjump occurs, if any drive fails, etc).

The GM is expected to narrate the consequences of those throws, but that is no different from how a D&D GM narrates the consequences of hp loss - and you are not including D&D combat within your "say 'yes'" rubric.

In Traveller (1977), if a player has their PC try and find a shady dealer, corrupt official etc then the rules specify what happens next: the GM sets a difficulty for the Streetwise throw, and the player makes a throw modified by their Streetwise skill. The GM has the job of setting the difficulty (by reference to the examples provided); but the player is not asking a question to which the GM might say "yes", any more than would be the case with your giant rat example, where the GM has to set a difficulty for the attempt to shoot the rat with a crossbow.

 

[Reynard]

to quote from Classic Traveller


It then goes on to discuss solitaire play, standalone scenarios, and campaign play.
The traveller Referee is axiomatically not empowered to be the sole authority, but to fairly decide situations.

In Traveller (1977), when a player declares that their starship makes a jump, there are various throws to be made (to determine if a misjump occurs, if any drive fails, etc).

The GM is expected to narrate the consequences of those throws, but that is no different from how a D&D GM narrates the consequences of hp loss - and you are not including D&D combat within your "say 'yes'" rubric.

In Traveller (1977), if a player has their PC try and find a shady dealer, corrupt official etc then the rules specify what happens next: the GM sets a difficulty for the Streetwise throw, and the player makes a throw modified by their Streetwise skill. The GM has the job of setting the difficulty (by reference to the examples provided); but the player is not asking a question to which the GM might say "yes", any more than would be the case with your giant rat example, where the GM has to set a difficulty for the attempt to shoot the rat with a crossbow.

That is interesting. I did not know that. Thanks.

That makes me rethink my definition of "permission" as it relates to traditional RPGs.

So, for example, where does item crafting fit into that paradigm in something like 3.x/Pathfinder. That subsystem has explicit rules, with specific outcomes, and other than letting the GM know what you added to you made and how much gold you had to delete, doesn't necessarily require the GM at all. As opposed to old school item and spell creation, which asked the Gm to come up with special ingredients and quests and stuff.

I'll have to mull that around a little bit in the context of this hypothetical.

 

[aramis erak]

That is interesting. I did not know that. Thanks.

Essentially, Traveller's equivalent to Rule 0 is, as in Frei Kriegspiel, that the Referee must remain fair.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Honestly, most of the RPGs I've ever run have assumed that, barring hidden influences, once you've gotten the basic information, you don't need any special permission to take an action.