GM fiat - an illustration

[nevin]

Imagine if you had a core book that was clear about what the system and culture has established and baked it into a set of, at the very least, best practices. Perhaps with strong examples of different styles of play that tables might fall into, and gave ideas of what it looks like to execute that well for both players and DMs? I mean, it might put The Alexandrian et al out of business I guess.

Again, the OSR community did this; to the point where some of the newer games are very explicit about "how to run and play this game well." They're very concerned with avoiding "GM fiat" through use of extensive prep; random tables; open information; etc.

then at least half the people playing it would modify that and do thier own thing. I can imagine it but I can't imagine everyone playing the way you demand.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Imagine if you had a core book that was clear about what the system and culture has established and baked it into a set of, at the very least, best practices. Perhaps with strong examples of different styles of play that tables might fall into, and gave ideas of what it looks like to execute that well for both players and DMs? I mean, it might put The Alexandrian et al out of business I guess.

Advice is always okay. But I think taking a game as broad as D&D is now, and narrowing the focus too much would make it feel constrictive for certain styles

Again, the OSR community did this; to the point where some of the newer games are very explicit about "how to run and play this game well." They're very concerned with avoiding "GM fiat" through use of extensive prep; random tables; open information; etc.

But OSR games are specialized. D&D is not that focused. A lot of OSR people liked 5E, because they felt it was friendly to OSR sensibilities. But I wouldn't want to see OSR dominate all of D&D, as much as I like the OSR, because D&D is used for a wider variety of play styles (many of which are well outside the OSR).

 

[zakael19]

So it's impossible to a) analyze D&D play by talking about what actually happens at the table and structures thereof, b) write a set of guidelines for GMs and players of how to have quality play in a variety of established table styles, or c) be explicit about what the core of D&D facilitates well. Which to me says "the entire game is up to GM fiat, and the only recourse is for a GM to 'git good' or the table to walk away."

But we can sit here and poke holes in very explicit guidelines and descriptions of play from games like TB2, BITD & etc that are at pains to facilitate their explicit style of play through discreet guidance and procedures.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Which to me says "the entire game is up to GM fiat, and the only recourse is for a GM to 'git good' or the table to walk away."

Well this is not what we are saying

 

[pemerton]

So it's impossible to a) analyze D&D play by talking about what actually happens at the table and structures thereof

<snip>

But we can sit here and poke holes in very explicit guidelines and descriptions of play from games like TB2, BITD & etc

By Jove, I think you're getting it!

 

[Bedrockgames]

So it's impossible to a) analyze D&D play by talking about what actually happens at the table and structures thereof, b) write a set of guidelines for GMs and players of how to have quality play in a variety of established table styles, or c) be explicit about what the core of D&D facilitates well. Which to me says "the entire game is up to GM fiat, and the only recourse is for a GM to 'git good' or the table to walk away."

a) it isn't but I think teh method of analysis in this thread, is one that really is more about favoring a particular style of play and that is hostile towards GM authority. A lot of D&D is grounded in the kind of GM authority people in the thread are complaining about, and while that authority isn't everything in the game, where it exists is kind of important for allowing a wide variety of approaches. C) Here I think you will get dozens of different answers because people use D&D for different things. What I like about D&D is a system most people understand and it comes with a bunch of tools and ingredients I find lend themselves well to long term campaigns. But I don't think D&D has to be about "just X" or "just Y".

 

[zakael19]

Well this is not what we are saying

Ok, so what are the structures which stop that? What does the game itself in play do which curtails fiat? What does the rulebook tell the GM "hey, don't be like this?" (note; I haven't read the 2024 one, it might do a better job; Tales of the Valiant at least has a bit).

 

[robertsconley]

What are the nuts and bolts of it?

The main physical format is what I call situation reports. These are working documents with notes on motivations, goals, and plans for factions and NPCs. They serve as a memory aid and a projection of what would unfold if the PCs don’t interfere.

To illustrate this I will use my Nomar campaign set in the Majestic Wilderlands that I ran back in 2012. To provide some context here is the first campaign log I posted.

GURPS Majestic Wilderlands: Campaign Update #1

Here is the first part of what happened.
A Sandbox Campaign, the Nomar Campaign Part 1

The campaign started when the players decided they wanted to be a group of mercenaries. I listed the different places in the Majestic Wilderlands where mercenaries were being employed, and they opted to play in Nomar.
Some background on Nomar if you are interested
Noble Houses of Nomar.
Regional Map of Nomar

I attached the handout the players got to this post. Campaign Starter, Mercernary.

Next I started a local map. I never finished the polished version as the players moved elsewhere before I had it finished.

As well as a map of the main settlement

Next, I made a situation map. I like do these in poetic style as the graphics helps remember things.

There are important locations highlighted there. That I have notes on including who there, what resources there are. Goals, motivations, and plans.

The main set of notes look like this.

The western half of the Estoil Hills. Because Mala sits right in the middle they have little contact with the eastern rebels and refugees.

A) A village with about 200 people hidden in a small forest at far northwestern end of the Estoil Hills. It is led by Acacoatl and his band of 20 warriors. Acacoatl styles himself Lord of Halkemenan, and Zothay. He was a noble who survived Divolic’s conquest. He claims leadership of the western rebels. Well he tries to claim leadership. His goal is to unite the western rebels into a single force however he is not very popular. Also he only has a vague idea of what to do after that.

B) A small ten man rebel band lead by Tlilpoca an ex-arena fighter what you would call a gladiator. He and Acacoatl do not get along. His men are not well disciplined and known for their boisterous drinking parties. Tlilpoca is angry over the death of his family at the hands of Duke Divolic's men. His men raid and pillage indiscriminatley. The peasants of Chugo and Mageven river valley from Rhyl to Tecamu fear him and his band as much as they do Duke Divolic's men.


C) This small forest is has a ruined tower the remains of an old Halkemenan or Nomar border fort. Nobody really knows. It is inhabited by Darcax a hedge mage. Villagers and rebels go to him for healing, charms and sometimes advice. The forest is guarded by animated skeletons. Darcax fled the temple in Chugo where he was training when it was conquered and just trying to survive. However it is possible to persuade Darcax to join a cause if it can be shown it has a chance.

D) A village with 300 people built into a bluff alongside Nopanzin Creek. The village is led by the Lady Izquitl who was a well known and respect noble in the city state of Halkmenan. Most of the rebel bands go to her for supplies including Acacoatl. She often called to adjudicate disputes. She only has a trusted man-at-arms Chatzin and five warriors at her command. She also building a clandestine network of spies and smugglers among the peasantry of Chugo and Mala. Not only to gather information but to give aid discretely when possible.

E) A rebel camp, led by Hual the Strong, they have ten men at the camp but after a run in with the Snakes there only have a handful left at best. Hual has some military training but was drummed out for cowardice. Hual got pissed at superior and viewed them as venial and corrupt however he never talks about. He is a genius at organization and a skilled warrior. They don’t call him the strong for nothing. His initial goal was survival but after his recent setback he realized that he has look beyond day to day survival. He it not sure what to do or who to ally with although out of all the rebel bands he is impressed with Lady Izquitl the most.

F) A larger rebel encampment led by a brother and sister twin named Cuet, the sister, and Cual, the brother. We think they were arena fighters. They have 20 warriors under their command. Their forces known they also have some personal issues with the lord in charge of Mala. They were enslaved during the conquest and sent to city state train to fight in the arena as a brother and sister team. Five years ago they won they return as they vowed vengeance against Lord Vanarius the man who killed their parents and enslaved them.

G) Everybody stays clear of the forest in the center Estoil Hills. It is home to the court of the Forest Folk and anybody goes in is lucky to come out again. It is the home of Lady Yohuallani of the Rose Oath. Much of her power comes from the recreation of stories of loyalty. Here forest has a forbiddening reputation because those who enter will start to focus on searching for someone they lost. Or fulfill a unfinished vow. Those who have failed due to choice will get ensnared by reliving their failure. Since time moves differently here those who enter appears to go missing until they emerge months or years later. Since the consquest and the refugees fleeing into the hills this has given the forest a dangerous reputation. Lady Yohuallani can be a powerful ally for the rebels or anybody who trying to free Halkemenan from Lord Divolic.

H) The Quarry recently ravaged by the Hounds of Hamakhis The Hounds are spirits of vengance released when one of Divolic's patrols slaughtered an entire refugee camp. Can be put to rest burying the desecrated remains of the refugees.


Mala – Lord Vanarius a High Archon of Set rules in the name of Duke Divolic. There are three companies stationed in Mala. Hanson’s Band, The Fiery Swords, and the Duke’s Crossbowmen. His goal is to swept the hills of rebels and begin building supply caches for the eventual invasion of Nomar by Lord Divolic. He feels if he succeed at this, Duke Divolic will make him a count.

Chugo – Sir Janius is a Tharian Horselord who is loyal to Duke Divolic. He took over from his father a couple of years back. Everybody hates him as he and his buddies just ride around doing whatever they want. He has no sense so the rebels run rings around him. As a result his grip on Chugo is tenuous and it will be one of the first places to fall when the rebellion begins. Sir Janius want to raise his forces and joined Duke Divolic in the ongoing City-State civil war but is frustrated that he has been refused permission.

Abberset – The Count of Shodan and the Baron Abberset despise Halkmenans as they worship Hamakhis the God of the Dead and practice human sacrifice. They and most of their court make little distinction between Halkemenans worship of Hamakhis as Judge of the Dead, and the worship of Hamakhis as Lord of the Dead back in their original homeland on the Isle of the Blest. However the peasantry, guildsmen, and merchant often get along with the Halkemenans.

What will happens is periodically I will update the situation report above as the campaign unfolds. In the case of Abberset my notes got a minor update when the party returned to Abberset at this.

A) Abberset (8/20/12, 9/10/12) (Portly Pomp 7th to 8th, 4460 BCCC)
Group returns to Abberset. Aeron finds a Skandian spy learns that Divolic is doing something to the east that involves something that will badly effect the Skandians. The spy is taken out by the party at the Mud Frog Inn. Sir Henry and Durgo joins a hunt with Captain Hawkwood and the Count's Baliff. An owlbear is killed. Sir Cei rides north to see Sir Mordran of the Brotherhood of the Wyrm and pledges his service. Kermit entertains the keep with a popular puppet show. Delvin finds a map of the wandering of Master Vanal a famed Dwarven explorer and possible treasure in the eastern Estoil Hills.

And after they left the region it didn't matter as I had to focus on the new area they headed too.

D) Estoil Hills (10/22/12) (Portly Pomp 13th, 4460 BCCC)
Sir Cei convinces the party that with the treasure they found in the dungeon that they can buy off their contract. That they would have better luck with the Brotherhood of the Wyrm and fighting Skandian Vikings. After some debate the party agree and heads north.

How the "Timeline" Emerges
I don’t write out a traditional “event-by-date” timeline in advance. Instead:

The situation report functions as a latent timeline, it describes what factions and NPCs will do if nothing changes.

As players act, I update the notes. New entries are added with in-world dates (e.g., “Portly Pomp 13th, 4460 BCCC”), reflecting what happened or shifted.

When the PCs left the region, I stopped updating it, just as a historian would stop writing a chronicle once the scene moves.

Example of a situation update.

Abberset Portly Pomp 13th, 4460 BCCC
The party returns. Aeron uncovers a Skandian spy. Sir Henry joins a hunt. Sir Cei pledges service to the Brotherhood of the Wyrm. Kermit entertains the keep. Delvin discovers a map from Master Vanal.

This would be note in a program I use called the Keep by nBos. Or an entry in a notebook if it is a face to face session.

These entries are not scripts. They’re branches of potential action, modified by player intervention, oracles, or rolls.

Memory & Organization
A lot of this is “in my head,” but it's supported by:

• Maps
• Character writeups
• Spatial context

I’ve always linked events to geography, which helps me recall timelines like a mental gazetteer. This technique, which is a variant of the Palace of Memory technique, associates characters and events with geography.

This is why I recommend referees develop a method of organizing info that works for them. It must track people, their motivations, and events across time and geography in a coherent way.

Why I Don’t Use Clocks
I’m not against other folks using clocks. I don’t use them because, in my experience, chains of events don’t progress in neat, measured increments. Too many interconnected factors are in play in my campaigns, and clocks don’t capture those interconnections in a way that works for me.

From what I’ve read, clocks are great when you need visible escalation—they give structure to looming threats or timed developments. But they don’t work as well for causal branching that unfolds across geography or depends on multiple actors with conflicting goals.

So yes, my timelines exist, but they’re not segmented wheels. They’re conditional flows of action—embedded in geography and narrative—updated as the PCs interact with the world. The structure is procedural, just not tied to a particular format.

As for GM fiat… generally when I’ve been using the term, I’ve just been talking about the GM making authorial decisions. So setting details and backstory and NOCS and their goals and outlooks, as well as extrapolations from all of that stuff.

As for GM fiat, while I get that you're using it to mean "the GM making authorial decisions," I think two things need to be pointed out.

First, like "railroading," GM fiat is often used as a pejorative, even if unintentionally. It implies arbitrariness or unearned authority, and that colors how people receive it, especially when comparing styles.

Second, saying "the GM makes authorial decisions" is fine as far as it goes, but it often skips over how those decisions are made. And that’s critical. There’s a big difference between a referee who decides things on a whim and one who uses structured methods, goals, constraints, causal logic, oracles, even randomness, to shape outcomes. The process behind the decision is what defines the experience at the table, not just the fact that the GM made a call.

Most of all of that stuff is largely up to the GM. Through play, those elements may start to interact with one another. Perhaps the PCs disrupt an NPCs goals, which the GM then extrapolates that the NPC seeks aid of another faction with whom that NPC had history.

My point earlier in the thread, and I think it applies now, is that’s a lot of GM authorship directing play. People sometimes forget that. They describe it as a simulation or as organic or what have you… but it’s a bunch of GM decisions interacting with one another.

And again… there is nothing wrong with that. It simply is so. For me… my preference and what I’d try to do in that… is to offload some of those decisions to some other method than me deciding.

Now it seems like you may roll in at least some cases to see how things will go. If so, that’s the kind of thing I’m talking about. If not, again nothing wrong with it, but let’s call it what it is… the GM deciding.

I think the key issue isn’t that the referee makes decisions, it’s how those decisions are made.

In World in Motion, I’m not inventing outcomes to shape a story. I’m resolving developments based on prior events, character goals, constraints, and, when needed, randomizers. The decisions are grounded in the setting’s internal logic, not narrative intent.

That process matters. It’s like alternate history writing, anyone can say “what if,” but a good alt-history works through consequences based on the world as it was. The value comes from disciplined plausibility, not just authorial invention.

So yes, the referee is deciding. But it’s not all the same kind of decision. The process matters, there’s a big difference between directing outcomes and adjudicating plausible consequences.

I hope I addressed every point you raised.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Ok, so what are the structures which stop that? What does the game itself in play do which curtails fiat? What does the rulebook tell the GM "hey, don't be like this?" (note; I haven't read the 2024 one, it might do a better job; Tales of the Valiant at least has a bit).

No, you are painting an extreme position. There is a huge swath of territory between 'everything is about GM fiat' and 'GM fiat is a part of the game'. This varies a lot by edition, but I simply mean the games has lots of rules for different aspects of play. So you don't need fiat to do say a gather information roll in 3E. There is a rule for that. You don't need fiat to figure things like that out or figure out how to make a magic item in that edition. But there isn't anything in the game preventing GM fiat, because GM fiat is vital for opening up areas of unanticipated play. The thing that helps make the game boundless is the the ability of the GM to step in with Fiat when there are no clear rules for things, or the rules don't quite fit what the players say they are trying to do. And every group has to navigate that in their own way. In my experience, this isn't a problem for most tables (usually it is problem when you have a problem GM or a problem player present: and the solution there is to avoid gaming with such people)

 

[pemerton]

Sorry, I was talking about TB2e.
Can you elaborate?

You posted:

The TB camp roll doesn’t determine what specific monster comes to camp, this is dm decision.

<snip>

In TB, the specific monster is left for the dm to decide.

And as I replied, this is not correct.

Upthread of your post, I posted the basic rules for rolling for Camp Events, and for embellishment of those results by the GM:

The Camp Event roll is made on the appropriate one of six tables (Wilderness, Caverns, Ancient Ruins, Dungeons, Near Town, and Squatting in Town). The result determines what happens - basically, the lower the roll the worse.

In terms of GM embellishment, the principle is stated on pp 94 and 264 of the Scholar's Guide:

The individual camp events leave a lot of room for interpretation. When something odd comes up, roll with it. It’s the game master’s job to call for tests or single out victims of calamity and sort through the chaos. . . .

Camp events are sketches. They’re small, flavorful elements to add to the game that are designed to give the world a dimension that is larger than the needs and wants of the characters. Sometimes these elements are cruel; sometimes they are kind.

The game master should incorporate camp events with a critical eye. Bend them, break them and bind them into the ongoing story. Modify them to suit, but never let the adventurers off easy - and never deny them a lucky break.​

So, to reiterate: the Camp Event table indicates what event happens. In that basic functional sense, it's no different from any other random event table I've seen for a RPG.

Here's an example from actual play, which illustrates both the use of the table, and some GM embellishment:

The PCs had amassed 4 camp checks at this stage, and so were going to use them. Fea-bella performed a Survivalist check to find fresh water in the swamp, helped by both the other PCs (Telemere's survivalist; Golin's Cook to help identify clean water). This failed, and so they found water but not before Fea-bella became Sick from testing some less-than-fresh water, with Telemere regaining Hungry and Thirsty as a consequence of his helping, and Golin becoming Afraid.

They then had to haul their recovered frogs to their camp site: Golin, helped by Fea-bella, failed, and so the hauling left them Hungry and Thirsty again. And so they made camp one turn short of more Grind. I decided that this was an Unsafe camp (being in the middle of the Troll Fens and not too far from the moathouse). They got a +1 for camping in the Wilderness (Telemere is a Ranger) but no one wanted to keep watch, as they all had conditions to recover: Fea-bella H+T, Exhausted and Sick; Golin H+T, Exhausted, Angry and Afraid; Telemere H+T and Exhausted. So the net modifier was -1 to the camp events roll. Which was a 7, -1 = 6: Wandering monsters - remain in adventure phase as camp ends with a stand off!

The wandering monster was a single Dire Wolf, which was trying to capture the PCs. The PCs succeeded in the conflict, and Golin captured the Wolf and bound it with his trusty rope; but a minor compromise was owed, and Telemere's bow was broken in the skirmish. (The fiction did establish that the Wolf had closed with him as he was trying to hold it off with his archery.) This made Telemere (and his player) very Angry, something consistent with the Grind ticking over. Fea-bella was Angry also, and Golin accrued the dreaded Sick.

They all took a sip from their camp's fresh water (thus eliminating H+T) while contemplating what to do with their bound Dire Wolf. They decided to bargain with it for service. Golin, who being a Shrewd Dwarven Outcast suffers no Precedence penalty when bargaining (and the Dire Wolf being Precedence 1 vs the PCs' zero), was conflict captain.

The PCs offered to free the Wolf, if it would join their party ("pack"); and were offering it plenty of frog to eat. As the Wolf explained in the common tongue, it wanted them to come with it to the Moathouse. The PCs succeeded, but owed a major compromise - the Wolf allied with them (and chowed down on frog), but they would go with it to the Moathouse.

They now camped. The Wolf took watch, but I decided that the danger level had stepped up from Unsafe to Dangerous (given that they were within Dire Wolf-tracking range of the Moathouse), so the modifier was still -1. The result was 9-1 = 8, Lost - "Lose your bearings while you rest. You must make a Pathfinder or Cartographer test to get back on track." As I narrated, their camp was in something of a hollow, and mists were rising off the swamp.

The PCs again drank water, to eliminate Hungry and Thirsty. Three checks were then spent for three successful recovery tests - all the PCs recovered from Angry. The fourth check was spent so that Golin could use frog meat to create preserved rations, but the test failed - and as Golin was getting ready to smoke the frog with his improvised cooking gear (all his real gear having been lost with his satchel while escaping from the Troll Haunt), the camp was approached by 3 bandits who demanded that the PCs surrender and come with them - a camp-ending twist!

As per @Manbearcat's post upthread, you can see the players making the rational decision to camp one turn short of the Grind clocking over.

You can see the GM (me) making an assessment of the danger level of the camp, which (as I posted upthread) gives a modifier to the Camp Event roll.

Also as per @Manbearcat's post, you can see the Ranger's class ability at work - +1 to Camp Event rolls in the wilderness.

You can see two events rolled and described - wandering monsters, with the subsequent rolls indicating a single Dire Wolf, and lost - and you can see the GM (me) embellishing them, "sorting through the chaos . . . [and] bind[ing] them into the ongoing story": the Dire Wolf is a scout from the Moathouse; the PCs become lost because mist rises in the swamp.

Similar to @Manbearcat's post, and consistently with the rules that I posted upthread, you can see the players spending their checks to perform actions: three recovery tests, and a Cook test. The latter fails, and the GM (me) decides to go for a twist rather than success with a condition. As per the rules that I posted upthread, from p 96 of the Scholar's Guide, "Said twist could be severe enough to cause camp to break prematurely": in this case, bandits from the Moathouse have found the PCs!

(Although the players had used all four of their camp checks, the ending of the camp due to this twist prevents them performing any actions in camp that wouldn't require a check, which would primarily encompass actions performed due to an Instinct.)

Torchbearer: The player(s) roll to see if they make camp successfully. On a failed roll, something bad (a "disaster") happens. Presumably, the GM picks what that bad thing is; I don't know if there are encounter tables. The Aetherial Premonition spell notifies the caster/party in the event of trouble.

It seems that, in addition to picking the monster, there's one bit of fiat that D&D has that TB doesn't have: in TB, it appears that if there's an intruder, it's always a bad thing

The players don't need to roll to make camp. As per p 90 of the Scholar's Guide:

Players can enter camp phase at any time, so long as:

• They have at least one check among them.
• The game master decides the characters are not in a conflict or immediate peril.
• They have a place to rest.

This then triggers the "Camp Phase Procedure", set out on the same page (and which I described, in summary form, in reply to you upthread):

Camp Phase Procedure
The players decide to make camp. They have a relatively safe place to rest and at least one check to spend. If the game master agrees the characters are not in immediate peril, then:

• The game master determines camp type by location.
• The game master selects the appropriate camp danger level.
• The players decide if they will survey the camp site or not.
• The players decide if they will light a fire or keep a dark camp.
• The players decide if they will set watch or not.
• The game master rolls on the appropriate camp events table and applies the result.
• If no disaster occurs, the players strategize and spend checks as appropriate.

In @Manbearcat's post, and above in this post, you can see players surveying their camp site, in the former case for shelter and concealment, in the latter case for water.

As the procedure indicates and the rules I've already quoted elaborate on, the Camp Event roll is made and the result interpreted and applied by the GM.

Not all arrivals at a camp need be unfriendly or threatening. For example, here is the result of 19 on the Wilderness Camp Event Table:

Fellow traveler. Meet a helpful fellow wanderer. Their level is two higher than the highest-level character. If the highest level is 9, then this is a retired adventurer. If treated with hospitality, the wanderer will share wine, information in the form of warnings, advice relevant to the adventurers’ current endeavor or they will leave a gift (roll on Loot Table 3).

Roll 1d6 for class: 1 Ranger; 2 Outcast; 3 Magician; 4 Warrior; 5 Burglar; 6 Theurge.​

This is the sort of thing that the GM is expected to embellish: the NPC might be someone the PCs have already met, or are hoping to meet (eg Glorfindel's arrival in the Ettenmoors).

Why do you see this as a disconnect between player & character? The player is hoping for a positive outcome from AP. The character, in setting the AP to free their mind for other tasks that might result in a positive outcome, seeks the same thing.

I was going to post exactly this! Protected by their Otherworldly ward, the PCs rest better, are more relaxed and so able to look out for good things, etc.