Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Alexander Kalinowski" data-source="post: 7559755" data-attributes="member: 6931283"><p>The fact that the GM has the power to rule that an action is unsuccessful or even cannot be successfully completed. And possibly not even attempted. If a PC is under a love spell, a player might declare that his PC is going to attack the object of his love. The GM can deny that and tell the player to choose a different course of action under these circumstances. Not the usual circumstances of gameplay but just one demonstration that declaring "my character will do this" by no means guarantees that the character will de facto attempt to do that.</p><p></p><p></p><p>A player is of course at liberty to declare that his PC is going to jump to the moon, if he wants to. But if the GM denies it, his action declaration does not amount to more than a declaration of intent.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If the GM rules that your PC cannot perform the action that you just declared, what are you going to do about it except go and find a new GM? </p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, statements like these of course do not pretend to hold true for all RPGs. "Due to the very nature of the RPGs" is short-hand for "Due to the very nature of MAINSTREAM RPGs". You know, the standard model of role-playing - D&D, Shadowrun, GURPS, Warhammer, Traveller, Palladium, etc.?</p><p></p><p></p><p>"Hey, guys, just giving you a heads-up but in my AD&D campaign, we're playing with movement rates doubled, I think that makes more sense."</p><p></p><p></p><p>"Hey, GM, aren't you supposed to roll on the reaction table?"</p><p>"Nah, I'm good, I know what that PC is thinking and feeling in this scene already."</p><p>Again, what are you going to do about it except walk out? </p><p>Also, I hope you're not under the impression that people who buy core rulebooks out there check each corebook if the specific system gives the GM explicit license to invoke a Rule 0-equivalent. It's the default assumption.</p><p></p><p></p><p>...and dependent on the GM's approval, even if only tacitly so. If you're playing in my next D&D campaign a bunch of Level 1 characters who just escaped slavery, you might have no starting equipment except the shirts on your backs. And possibly have your current HP levels halved.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The only true check on GM power is the players' unwillingness to put up with his nonsense any longer. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, it's the default assumption. Just look at Matt Mercer and Critical Role. That is mainstream GMing. Other philosophies exist but they're more niche. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>(Emphasis added.)</p><p>Quod erat demonstrandum.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I am presuming that your PCs are not in a region in which hospitals are (fiction-wise) a rarity? Because how heavy-handed your just saying "Yes" is depends entirely on the likelihood of finding one under these circumstances. If they're on a planet lacking any sentient life, it's quite heavy-handed. If they're in the Imperial capital, it's not heavy-handed at all. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, because it gets really tiresome to <u>explicitly</u> refer to mainstream RPGs every time. It's instead presumed that readers can deduce what was meant and don't feel the need to point out that there are different models away from the mainstream - because it's a given.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alexander Kalinowski, post: 7559755, member: 6931283"] The fact that the GM has the power to rule that an action is unsuccessful or even cannot be successfully completed. And possibly not even attempted. If a PC is under a love spell, a player might declare that his PC is going to attack the object of his love. The GM can deny that and tell the player to choose a different course of action under these circumstances. Not the usual circumstances of gameplay but just one demonstration that declaring "my character will do this" by no means guarantees that the character will de facto attempt to do that. A player is of course at liberty to declare that his PC is going to jump to the moon, if he wants to. But if the GM denies it, his action declaration does not amount to more than a declaration of intent. If the GM rules that your PC cannot perform the action that you just declared, what are you going to do about it except go and find a new GM? Well, statements like these of course do not pretend to hold true for all RPGs. "Due to the very nature of the RPGs" is short-hand for "Due to the very nature of MAINSTREAM RPGs". You know, the standard model of role-playing - D&D, Shadowrun, GURPS, Warhammer, Traveller, Palladium, etc.? "Hey, guys, just giving you a heads-up but in my AD&D campaign, we're playing with movement rates doubled, I think that makes more sense." "Hey, GM, aren't you supposed to roll on the reaction table?" "Nah, I'm good, I know what that PC is thinking and feeling in this scene already." Again, what are you going to do about it except walk out? Also, I hope you're not under the impression that people who buy core rulebooks out there check each corebook if the specific system gives the GM explicit license to invoke a Rule 0-equivalent. It's the default assumption. ...and dependent on the GM's approval, even if only tacitly so. If you're playing in my next D&D campaign a bunch of Level 1 characters who just escaped slavery, you might have no starting equipment except the shirts on your backs. And possibly have your current HP levels halved. The only true check on GM power is the players' unwillingness to put up with his nonsense any longer. Well, it's the default assumption. Just look at Matt Mercer and Critical Role. That is mainstream GMing. Other philosophies exist but they're more niche. (Emphasis added.) Quod erat demonstrandum. I am presuming that your PCs are not in a region in which hospitals are (fiction-wise) a rarity? Because how heavy-handed your just saying "Yes" is depends entirely on the likelihood of finding one under these circumstances. If they're on a planet lacking any sentient life, it's quite heavy-handed. If they're in the Imperial capital, it's not heavy-handed at all. Yes, because it gets really tiresome to [U]explicitly[/U] refer to mainstream RPGs every time. It's instead presumed that readers can deduce what was meant and don't feel the need to point out that there are different models away from the mainstream - because it's a given. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
Top