GM Authority (Edited For Clarity, Post #148)

[Jd Smith1]

This is not correct. You have Shadows being summoned by the Red Witch. You have scrying/augury by the Red Witch. You have Raise Dead by the The Red Priest. You have illusions in the warlock's tower. You have whatever Sorcery is done by the Magisters. The ones that made Varys a eunuch so they could use his junk for magic. You have Domination via wargs. Prophecy in Westeros that Cersei and her friend encountered. And more.

Warlock's Tower? The Red Witch, as I already pointed out, was using finite items, not inherent spell magic. The Magisters, as was made amply clear in the first two books, did not perform magic, but instead were scholars and chemists. The Spider's incident did not occur in Westros, as I already noted. Cerci encountered a fortune-teller, notorious for con games.

You're desperately reaching to apply game concepts to non-magical actions.

 

[tetrasodium]

Warlock's Tower? The Red Witch, as I already pointed out, was using finite items, not inherent spell magic. The Magisters, as was made amply clear in the first two books, did not perform magic, but instead were scholars and chemists. The Spider's incident did not occur in Westros, as I already noted. Cerci encountered a fortune-teller, notorious for con games.

You're desperately reaching to apply game concepts to non-magical actions.

House of the Undying

The House of the Undying is a location in Qarth. It is the headquarters of the Warlocks of Qarth. It is a large tower without any visible openings and surrounded by trees which are used to make shade of the evening. Daenerys, Jorah Mormont and Kovarro reach the House of the Undying. While trying...

gameofthrones.fandom.com

Why does it seem like the people most adamantly speaking what a game based on game of thrones could not possibly include are the least knowledgeable about the setting?

 

[Panjumanju]

I'll be frank, I'm not sure I can parse that sufficiently well. What I am saying has nothing at all to do with how a GM runs or how much time they put into the campaign or if they are hosting or not -- these are red herrings. What I am saying is that, when deciding to play a game, everyone is on equal footing. Being the GM gives no special place in the decision of what game to run. If the decision is for a game the GM doesn't want to run, then it's the same as being a player that doesn't want to play in a certain game -- that person doesn't play in the game. The mistake made here is that usually the GM deciding not to play means no game, and the control over that is confused with righteous authority over the social group. This is a bad take.

As for bad faith, at no point have I engaged in bad faith, here. I've patiently answered you the same way, even though you keep accusing me of saying things I haven't said, implying I mean things I haven't said, and telling me I'm angry or have a chip on my shoulder. None of this is correct, yet I haven't lashed out or accused you of bad faith. My points have remained constant and unchanging, so I'm not darting around looking for the next goalpost location. The accusation of bad faith is itself bad faith. I will thank you to desist.

You crossed the line of bad faith to accuse me of imagining things; that's text book bad faith. And you're darn right I have been looking for goal posts; your writing seems to be the enemy of clarity.

As to your point - the idea that the GM, or potental GM has equal footing as the players in deciding what to run is radical. The fact that most games start with someone saying "I have an idea for running something" immediately shifts that balance. That authority does not have to be righteous, it's inherent.

By the time we get to the table where the GM has already preapred whatever they've prepared, only to have that short down, you must conceed that to say that's a red herring or should have no baring on the table dynamic is itself an (at best) unusual position to take.

//Panjumanju

 

[Jd Smith1]

House of the Undying

The House of the Undying is a location in Qarth. It is the headquarters of the Warlocks of Qarth. It is a large tower without any visible openings and surrounded by trees which are used to make shade of the evening. Daenerys, Jorah Mormont and Kovarro reach the House of the Undying. While trying...

gameofthrones.fandom.com

Why does it seem like the people most adamantly speaking what a game based on game of thrones could not possibly include are the least knowledgeable about the setting?

Not in Westros. And again, chemistry and training rather than verifiable;e magic.

The entire thrust of the first three books was that magic was gone from Westros, and in the latter two it was starting to return in very slight doses. There isn't anything resembling a D&D style spellcaster in any of the books, just some half understood rituals regaining their potency.

Try as you might, it is not a D&D style approach to magic. The sparse nature of your increasingly wild claims just proves the point.

 

[Maxperson]

Warlock's Tower? The Red Witch, as I already pointed out, was using finite items, not inherent spell magic. The Magisters, as was made amply clear in the first two books, did not perform magic, but instead were scholars and chemists. The Spider's incident did not occur in Westros, as I already noted. Cerci encountered a fortune-teller, notorious for con games.

You're desperately reaching to apply game concepts to non-magical actions.

She was not using finite items. She was using what would in D&D be called spell components. And yes, Daenerys went to the warlocks tower in one of the early cities she visited. They wanted a dragon. It was full of illusions and other magic and eventually her dragons burned it down and broke the spells. The magisters are not chemists. Those were the ones in Westeros who created Wildfire, and it is directly said that they use spells. Spells which became more efficient and powerful once the dragons hatched. The fortune teller that Cersei encountered was correct in her predictions.

I've read the series at least 5 times. I'm not trying to add anything that isn't already there.

 

[Jd Smith1]

She was not using finite items. She was using what would in D&D be called spell components. And yes, Daenerys went to the warlocks tower in one of the early cities she visited. They wanted a dragon. It was full of illusions and other magic and eventually her dragons burned it down and broke the spells. The magisters are not chemists. Those were the ones in Westeros who created Wildfire, and it is directly said that they use spells. Spells which became more efficient and powerful once the dragons hatched. The fortune teller that Cersei encountered was correct in her predictions.

I've read the series at least 5 times. I'm not trying to add anything that isn't already there.

Daenerys' experience was never made clear; it hinted at incense or gas as much as illusion.

And yes, the Magisters were chemists; there are numerous examples of them mixing compounds and maintaining copious supplies of materials, including poisons.

I don't know how many times you read the books, if at all, but you certainly missed the deliberate interplay with magic that GRR Martin laid out (and has commented upon in numerous places).

It certainly bears no resemblance to D&D's ever-present and endless magic.

 

[Maxperson]

Not in Westros. And again, chemistry and training rather than verifiable;e magic.

No. No it isn't. You're making stuff up now.

 

[Jd Smith1]

No. No it isn't. You're making stuff up now.

I'm beginning to doubt you've even read the books. Certainly you have no grasp of the premises involved in the series. Time to end this nonsense and return to the thread topic.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm beginning to doubt you've even read the books. Certainly you have no grasp of the premises involved in the series. Time to end this nonsense and return to the thread topic.

Orrrrrr else Melisandre birthed shadow monsters and Renly was killed by Stanis's shadow by maaaaaaaagic.

 

[Ovinomancer]

You crossed the line of bad faith to accuse me of imagining things; that's text book bad faith. And you're darn right I have been looking for goal posts; your writing seems to be the enemy of clarity.

Well, you've consistently misrepresented what I've actually said, and, in at least one case, gotten it entirely backwards. Plus you accuse me of having a chip on my shoulder. (shrug) Clearly, you've got a lot of imagination to do this, as neither are true or what is in my posts.

As for goalposts, moving them is considered bad -- I haven't. I've been very consistent, and have explained the same thing to you multiple times. You claim I'm the enemy of clarity, but you've responded by accusing me of having ideas I haven't even brought up, so I'm wondering if maybe it's you.

As to your point - the idea that the GM, or potental GM has equal footing as the players in deciding what to run is radical. The fact that most games start with someone saying "I have an idea for running something" immediately shifts that balance. That authority does not have to be righteous, it's inherent.

Yes, I'm aware it's radical to many, because it's a deeply ingrained bad take in our hobby -- that GM's are special.

By the time we get to the table where the GM has already preapred whatever they've prepared, only to have that short down, you must conceed that to say that's a red herring or should have no baring on the table dynamic is itself an (at best) unusual position to take.

//Panjumanju

If the GM has prepared things on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, they're the jerk. If you get to the table without first having a discussion about what to run, and getting buy-in, the GM is the jerk. It's a pretty simple concept -- ask, don't demand. It's also called the Golden Rule -- if you're going to be upset that others aren't agreeing with you, then you should recognize they may be upset if you don't agree with them. Instead, maybe adopt an attitude where you talking to people instead of expecting them to roll over because you invested some time in your pet project.