GM fiat - an illustration

[thefutilist]

It always confounds me to hear people say things that indicate that the players are even part of the game when they're fundamentally ignorant of key information.

I mean, sure, we label activities as 'games' where no skill at all is involved, but they're generally considered pretty trivial. Either I have information, perhaps contingent on something I know I could pick as a move in the game, or else no skill, no CHOICE exists in any meaningful sense.

So, yes, knowledge is absolutely essential, fundamental.

What do you think the benefits of having a GM are then?

Because to me, having hidden information seems one the features. although given it's the feature i'm least keen on the other reason I've found is strong scene framing authority. gmless games have to deal with that somehow and it does have limitations. although maybe i'm not looking at enough gmless games.

 

[hawkeyefan]

A mystery is just a kind of puzzle to solve, and that's every bit as real in game as out. It's a mental exercise based on clues. That it's in an RPG doesn't matter.

They’re both puzzles to solve.

@hawkeyefan It makes just as much sense to say that there cannot be real decisions, real drama or real agency in an RPG because the events are fictional than to say there cannot be real mystery for the same reason. It is complete nonsense.

No, because I as a player of a game can make actual decisions based on the game. I can move my bishop diagonally or I can say my wizard cast’s magic missile. Those are real decisions I make as a player.

When I “solve” a mystery in an RPG, I’ve declared actions for my character that ultimately result in a “solution” to the mystery. I eliminate some information and confirm other information until such a point that the “truth” is revealed.

It’s not nonsense for me to be able to separate what’s happening at the table and what’s happening in the participants’ collective imagination.

 

[FrogReaver]

No worries at all! I appreciate the sentiment, but I don’t mind engaging with multiple folks. I just might not reply to every comment unless it adds something new.



No, each is made up… each has the illusion of cause and effect. One is determined ahead of time. The other is determined during play. But they both produce a result that is plausible and to which appear to have cause and effect within the game’s fiction.

Thanks. Let me take a step back then since I obviously misunderstood you.

Instead of asking what if real means having the illusion of cause and effect, let me ask what if real means - ‘determined ahead of time’?

 

[FrogReaver]

IMO on mysteries I suppose that to me what makes one real and the other less real is that if the game were to end prematurely could the dm or someone tell you who actually did it?

Now why is that important? Because the knowledge that there is a concrete culprit from the start impacts how the game is played. It’s the difference in trying to suss out an objective answer vs trying to steer the answer towards the culprit one would like it to be.

(Because the ability to steer the fiction external to your pc is the kind of player agency narrativism typically advocates for and the kind of mechanics it typically employs).

 

[Bedrockgames]

IMO on mysteries I suppose that to me what makes one real and the other less real is that if the game were to end prematurely could the dm or someone tell you who actually did it?

It is like the game clue: the answer is objectively inside the envelope

 

[hawkeyefan]

Thanks. Let me take a step back then since I obviously misunderstood you.

Instead of asking what if real means having the illusion of cause and effect, let me ask what if real means - ‘determined ahead of time’?

Then I would say a more accurate term, which clearly applies to one and not the other, was being used.

 

[hawkeyefan]

It is like the game clue: the answer is objectively inside the envelope

Clue is also not a real mystery.

 

[FrogReaver]

It is like the game clue: the answer is objectively inside the envelope

Right.

One thing I’m currently thinking about is the criticism of around lack of player knowledge in non narrativism games. But doesn’t making most everything up on the fly in a narrativism style game mean players are just as much without information. It’s just the cause of that lack of information is different. System vs DM.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Right.

One thing I’m currently thinking about is the criticism of around lack of player knowledge in non narrativism games. But doesn’t making most everything up on the fly in a narrativism style game mean players are just as much without information. It’s just the cause of that lack of information is different. System vs DM.

My point about running a mystery with Hillfolk was meant to address this point. The information about the mystery didn’t exist until a player finally revealed it in dialogue. There are other ways to doit of course. But that is different from a game where we are learning things through investigation that the gm has decided. They aren’t better or worse. There is just a distinction that matters here

 

[Bedrockgames]

Clue is also not a real mystery.

You are taking me way too literally. I was using clue as an analogy. But the point is what is contained in the envelope is a real mystery you can solve by opening the envelope. It would be a much different game if that info were rolled on a table at the end or players decided what was in there. Again this isn’t a crazy idea that the players in a game where the GM determines the details of the mystery before hand are really solving a mystery in this approach and that that can matter for agency. Also that takes nothing away from the approaches you are talking about (it is just acknowledging a difference between them)