GM fiat - an illustration

[Bedrockgames]

Players have railroad sense? I've never met one....and I'm a Railroad Tycoon.

Yes, players eventually catch on when they are being railroaded. If they didn't, people wouldn't complain about railroads because they would never realize they are on them

The idea that the DM must explain everything in detail to the players so the players can approve of it is wrong to me.

I never suggested this is at all

 

[Maxperson]

Hang on. You're saying that if you decide the one thing that will happen, it's an Unlimited Game of infinite possibility, but if hawkeye decides six things that could happen and rolls a d6 to determine which one it is, it's a Limited Game (TM). Isn't that the wrong way round? Doesn't his game have six possibilities while yours has one?

No. He's saying that if @hawkeyefan has a list with 6 possibilities, the results are limited to one of those 6. If @bloodtide isn't working from a list, he has unlimited possibilities and the results will be 1 of those unlimited amount. Unlimited > 6 last time I checked.

 

[Maxperson]

The second paragraph seems to contradict the first.

Anyway, I am using GM fiat as per the way it is used in the OP, and in this post: GM fiat - an illustration

Oxford Languages vis Google gives, as the meaning of "fiat", a formal authorization or proposition; a decree, and that's more-or-less what I'm talking about.

I'm also interested in the constraints that govern GM fiat, as obviously the existence and nature of such constraints significantly affects the RPGing experience.

So once again, a term is defined one way in RPGs and has been for decades and you've decided to try and redefine it in a thread. The results are predictable and happening. The OP, then, is not DM fiat. It's just DM decision making, which is usually no fiat.

 

[Maxperson]

Notice here that you are describing exactly what I've described above: you are not reasoning by reference to in-fiction causal paths, but rather making a roll. Take the same approach to everything else - how drunk or sober the assassin is, whether they attack from near or far, etc - and you end up with some version of a camp event roll!

I wouldn't play an RPG where rolls determined everything.

If I choose to roll in the assassin example above, it would be because from the in-fiction circumstances, there are multiple ways that are pretty likely to be the one that happens, so I'm rolling to see which one. It is still reasoning by reference to in-fiction causal paths, because all the possibilities are reasoning by reference to in-fiction causal paths.

 

[pemerton]

What would be the point? So I can quote page numbers?

Well, then you could learn the answers to questions like these:

So what about the rolls and rules that don't feel fair to the players? Does the GM just hold up the rulebook like a shield and say "it was not me, it was this rule here!" ?

Or do you pick games with only very slight "set backs" that can effect the characters? Like the worst thing you can get from the game for a "critical setback" is "oh, no your character bumped their head for one point of damage!".

Or does the game...."technically" have real "critical setbacks" like "your character is obliterated!" but they are supper rare...like you have to make a lot of rolls to get to one.

 

[pemerton]

So once again, a term is defined one way in RPGs and has been for decades and you've decided to try and redefine it in a thread. The results are predictable and happening. The OP, then, is not DM fiat. It's just DM decision making, which is usually no fiat.

One day you'll have to point me to this Official RPG Lexicon of yours!

But anyway, I try to avoid jargon, and use language with its natural meaning as much as possible.

 

[pemerton]

I wouldn't play an RPG where rolls determined everything.

If I choose to roll in the assassin example above, it would be because from the in-fiction circumstances, there are multiple ways that are pretty likely to be the one that happens, so I'm rolling to see which one. It is still reasoning by reference to in-fiction causal paths, because all the possibilities are reasoning by reference to in-fiction causal paths.

What does this remind me of? That's right, @hawkeyefan's roll to work out what happens when the avalanche strikes the giant.

And in Torchbearer, too, possibilities are also worked out by reference to in-fiction causal paths. Just not exclusively - as would be the case with the assassin. For instance, supposed that your random roll determines that the assassin is hung-over: that result now entails a new, prior, bit of in-fiction causation (ie the assassin acquiring some drink, and consuming it).

 

[hawkeyefan]

Well.....I imagine I'd win!

This is all on you. Just because you personally don't like something, does not make it some universal limit law.

I get that you can only think of a small number of answers, but that does not apply to everyone else.

This is where the amazing power of imagination and creation of some DMs comes in: the few that stand out from the rest.

I’d be willing to bet that if you even DM regularly, your game is a bog-standard viking hat DM power fantasy.

Of course what "relevant" to one person is not the same for everyone.

Well, there is a huge difference between the player and the DM, but guess we'd need a whole thread for this....

I would imagine that you care about your game and your setting far more than your players do.

Did you even read my example?

What example? The ham sandwich joke? I read it, I don’t think it makes a point.

Weird...a game limited to one city. But it is not weird at all that a character can make an inn/tavern every day?

The character doesn’t make the inn, silly. The inn’s always been there in the game world, and the player has the Knight character declare that he knows about it.

No different than when you tell your players an inn is nearby.

So when you just make up stuff about the landlord and inn for a minute or two, you are doing what us other DM do for a whole game. And other DMs don't need a player's permission to make stuff up.

It’s not about permission. And there are plenty of other parts of the game where I simply introduce new information just as you would in your game.

The difference is with Spire, I also have to do so in response to player prompts like the Pubcrawler ability. It’s a type of imagination that your game seems to lack.

Oh noes! Does that mean my game’s got moar imaginations?!??

My point is your rules don't have any thing to stop players from being jerks as they are so hostile to the DM and so pro player. If a player did try something, all your DM could do is say "yes, player".

The rules are hostile to the GM? No they’re not. Just because a rule gives some authority to a player doesn’t make it hostile to the GM.

But I suppose that’s a really telling supposition on your part.

But say, for example, in my game, if a player tried the dumb "my NPC buddy Bob gives me a million gold coins", I could just laugh in the players face and say "nope".

Wow you’re the coolest!

Not my foundation.

My RPG Foundation is Role-Playing(Acting) to do most things in the game.

I’m sure your players act like they’re looking around a room and then say “what do I see” and you tell them what they see.

That’s questions and answers.

Eh, only like 99% of things...

Well, in my game it is always Clobbering Time!

And my game is not just a big blank until the player(s) give me permission to create something they want.

Oh I’m sure it’s not! I’m sure it’s a big steaming pile of imagination!

 

[hawkeyefan]

No. He's saying that if @hawkeyefan has a list with 6 possibilities, the results are limited to one of those 6. If @bloodtide isn't working from a list, he has unlimited possibilities and the results will be 1 of those unlimited amount. Unlimited > 6 last time I checked.

Oh wait, you misunderstood me!

When stuff like this happens in my game, I go all Mentat, have a mild seizure, and imagine every single possible outcome that could happen.

Then I pick six to potentially happen in the game and then roll!

So I have infinite possibilities, too! And then six can potentially happen, instead of just the one!!

 

[Sepulchrave II]

This is an interesting discussion, although the tone is verging on acrimonious in places.

I find myself unable to decide if there is a meaningful difference between "DM Fiat" and "DM makes a decision" as the two ideas seem - speaking with natural language - synonymous in my head.

If the specific term "DM Fiat" has acquired a pejorative meaning - connoting depriving players of their agency - I'm not sure where that happened. Come to think of it, I'm not sure when "DM Fiat" entered the discourse as a recognized term, either. Is this a Forge thing?

Is it the same as "DM makes a ruling" or are there already too many fish in this kettle?