GM fiat - an illustration

[thefutilist]

Woah, we're not interchangeable. I think games can and should specify all possible points of interaction while still using task resolution; plans are built out of stacking actions drawn from a set of pre-knowable mechanics. My sense of Micah is that they're more amenable to GM designed resolutions moment to moment.

I am specifically opposed to negotiation as a standard part of the gameplay loop. I never want to sell anyone on whether or not a proposed action should work nor do I want to discuss the scope of an action's effectiveness.

My apologies. I was misinterpreting something you said earlier in the thread.

 

[thefutilist]

As for the point of play being for the players to judge the GM's ideas... that kind of comes across as almost the opposite dynamic of what should be expected. But if that's the focus of play, then sure, I don't see a problem with fuzzy rules and processes that require an increase in GM fiat. It's probably even ideal... it offers more opportunities for the players to see the GM's storytelling ability in action!

It's not about whether the GM is telling a story. Thinking about it in terms of story control is fundamentally misunderstanding it. Let me provide a more extreme example to illustrate my point.


In a game I was playing recently (as GM) one of the PC's really wanted his lover to accept what he did, he was a hit man. So he talked to her and tried to get her to understand and agree with where he was coming from. As the GM I listened to what he said, thought about what he said (reincorporated it), thought about the current personality of the lover, then made a decision. No she didn't accept it, his words didn't reach her.


That's a massive decision that's reached through fiat and that's kind of the point. I had to think about the lover and the words said and make an artistic statement within those creative limitations.


The main difference between the above and more 'skilled' play is that the decision criteria for the participants will be a bit different.


Or if you want it framed in a radically different way. The problem with 2E play was never the amount of power the GM had, it was the decision criteria they were using.

 

[Theory of Games]

The games of the past played pretty darn well (most of 'em) and it's inaccurate to compare them to how innovative design has changed ttrpgs. Internet service used to be slow and choppy and loud like a city bus, but it's better now and will be even better in twenty years. But to say, "Well the problem with the old internet was you had to be wired-up to use it" is off because it wasn't a problem back then. We should be careful to avoid Presentism and it's fallacious comparisons.

Presentism (historical analysis) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[hawkeyefan]

It's not about whether the GM is telling a story. Thinking about it in terms of story control is fundamentally misunderstanding it. Let me provide a more extreme example to illustrate my point.


In a game I was playing recently (as GM) one of the PC's really wanted his lover to accept what he did, he was a hit man. So he talked to her and tried to get her to understand and agree with where he was coming from. As the GM I listened to what he said, thought about what he said (reincorporated it), thought about the current personality of the lover, then made a decision. No she didn't accept it, his words didn't reach her.


That's a massive decision that's reached through fiat and that's kind of the point. I had to think about the lover and the words said and make an artistic statement within those creative limitations.


The main difference between the above and more 'skilled' play is that the decision criteria for the participants will be a bit different.


Or if you want it framed in a radically different way. The problem with 2E play was never the amount of power the GM had, it was the decision criteria they were using.

I don’t see how presenting the process in terms of an artistic decision does anything to distance it from storytelling.

Again, there’s nothing wrong with that if it’s what the participants at the table are into. But as a process? It’s different than a method that incorporates an element of randomness.

The focus… or the area of creativity on the part of the GM… is more the resolution rather than the setup.

 

[Maxperson]

There's no rule in baseball for when a bird steals the ball.

There's no bird player to do it.

We're talking about people playing the game.

(I've seen that happen. Once. At a friendly game in Anchorage... bald eagle stole the ball.) What I've read says that the Umpire on scene makes a call. Ours called it a walk and forbidden to steal.

I just pity whomever the eagle dropped it on...

That's pretty funny.

 

[loverdrive]

Fortunately, ttrpgs aren't about winning or losing. They're about having fun with a group of friends

All games are about having fun. That's, like, the nature of any recreational activity.

 

[thefutilist]

I don’t see how presenting the process in terms of an artistic decision does anything to distance it from storytelling.

Again, there’s nothing wrong with that if it’s what the participants at the table are into. But as a process? It’s different than a method that incorporates an element of randomness.

The focus… or the area of creativity on the part of the GM… is more the resolution rather than the setup.

Well the big difference is that if the GM has a plot planned out then he's not really reincorporating what the player says. He's not taking it into consideration because he already knows the outcome. If the GM doesn't have a plot planned out, then he is listening to what the players are saying and taking it into consideration.

 

[Micah Sweet]

All games are about having fun. That's, like, the nature of any recreational activity.

If only everyone had fun in exactly the same way...

 

[aramis erak]

There's no bird player to do it.

We're talking about people playing the game.

That's pretty funny.

Baseball does have a rule about when it HITS a bird (live ball). And for anything else, there is an umpire decides clause.

The point is, not all sports have rules for all circumstances that can happen in play. And at least one major league sport has an "umpire's decision."

Incomplete rules are not limited to RPGs. (in fact, referees in many wargames are given the same level of discretion, where it's intended for a game to be 3 or more people: one or more per side, plus a referee.)

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well the big difference is that if the GM has a plot planned out then he's not really reincorporating what the player says. He's not taking it into consideration because he already knows the outcome. If the GM doesn't have a plot planned out, then he is listening to what the players are saying and taking it into consideration.

This is why I never plan out plots. Just places and things that are going on.