D&D 5E Respect Mah Authoritah: Thoughts on DM and Player Authority in 5e

[Ovinomancer]

I think this is a good chance to talk about the differences in Story Now backstory usage that delineates it from other usage. This is a constant feature FYI.

1) In the session before this last one, 13 new NPCs were created from whole cloth that were essential to play. I had to notes on them prior to their deployment:

* Master Sergeant Rosco Hicks of the Bluecoat Precinct in Coalridge.

* 4 x Ministry of Preservation mercenaries that were imposed on the Coalridge force to be deputized so they could serve the wicked factory foreman that had been pulled out of retirement and placed back in Coalridge as an enforcer to quell a worker uprising.

* 4 x escorts that were secured from a brothel that the Crew are enemies with.

* Clerk who manages the logbook for hotel/apartment building where the mercs were staying on the top floor during their deployment.

* 2 x upper-crust/nobility looking fellows who were attending a card game with 4 aforementioned MoP mercs.

* 1 x maître-de of the hotel/apt.


These were all authored in that session for that session because they were situation-necessary (responsive to player action declarations, goals, or consequences of those action declarations).

Also authored in that session was the locale:

* The apt/hotel building including its features, its clientelle, where the mercs' apt was, and (very importantly) the features of their apt.

Notice the variance in resolution. That is key. Author only what is necessary and no more.


2) Last night? The Crew decided that 3 of those NPCs were very important players for the Score that was accreting in their minds. Consequently, I had to respond to their action declarations with fiction that was responsive to "player say" and "system say:"

* The Clerk was a young aspiring singer/songwriter named Evonia who does her thing at open mic night at an all-night Charterhall University Cafe called Insomnia. Sort of a Jewel figure with an enormously growing crowd.

* One of the 2 upper crust/nobility types was a renowned stage magician named Danton the Montebank. He works constantly for the upper crust of Duskvol and obviously has a bit of a card problem as well (like a Worms character from Rounders) as he gets in with some dangerous people for play.

* The other upper crust/nobility type was actually Charterhall's Dean of the Arts/Music Conservatory. He has a secret relationship with Evonia (she's a poor street performer and he's promised her a place in Charterhall's Orchestra...and he may have a more...intimate relationship with her...unclear). This relationship bought these two guys the ability to not sign in to the hotel/apt logbook.

* Later I had to author a bit of terrible fiction as their Transport Score found them in the middle of a high-rated Occult area in Six Towers. The Demon that is one of the Crew's Rivals (formerly possessed his physical rival; Bluecoat Darmot) has just finished her clock to reconstitute. So she is now "back in play" for me to use as a complication (though we didn't know who she was possessing). Well, I brought her in during a major complication last night on the rooftop where the group's Lurk was in an overwatch position with a long-gun; Lillith (the Demon) was possessing their oldest Crew Friend and a very important Crew-adjacent party; Esme the owner/operator of the tavern Just Booze.

---

I hope this firms up what is happening in Story Now games. My authorship (or the table's if I ask questions and use their answers) is respondent to the immediate needs of play. Need new people...new places? Author them? Do they need to be high resolution? No...leave it loose. Do they need to be high resolution now? Ok, firm it up.

This is not the same as other games (and again...this is a constant feature...this isn't a one-off...this is a constant feature of play).

I think it's absolutely critical to note that lots of these details were created as backstory in direct response to player actions. The relationship of the Dean and Evonia was created as a result of a successful check to get Evonia (who was the receptionist/clerk at the hotel/apts) to disgorge the identity of the two men via intimidation and veiled threats (which occurred after successfully bypassing security in the club to approach Evonia backstage away from others, a threatening position). The further elucidation that there may be a more romantic relationship was established during a later check made to identify the travel patterns of the Dean. No idea if there's anything to that (she was seen exiting his home after hours during surveillance), because the crew didn't follow up on that for the score, instead choosing to leverage other information (the fact that the Dean was travelling by cab with hired muscle after the bloodbath he'd escaped from in the apartment card game (that turned left hard)).

Functionally, all of this was being created from direct prompts from checks made. Had those checks turned out differently, different things would have been created.

 

[Manbearcat]

@Manbearcat thats perfectly normal in any style that relies more on improvisation. I often leave things undefined like that and fill them in as needed.

Alright. If:

a) You do it constantly (not here and there...constant, defining feature of play).

and

b) That content generation is principally bound by system premise + system say (rules, procedures, agenda, principles), and responsive to player say.

If (a) and (b) are both true? You're GMing Story Now!

 

[Ovinomancer]

@Manbearcat thats perfectly normal in any style that relies more on improvisation. I often leave things undefined like that and fill them in as needed.

The difference being what I just posted -- the GM isn't making things up because that's what they think should be happening, they only can the authority to improvise these things as prompted by the players and then constrained by the mechanics.

For instance, I got a 4/5 result on my check to intimidate Evonia into giving up the identity of the men. That's a result that calls for incomplete information that also introduces a clear complication. I bought that up to a 6 result (good/full info, no complication) by spending a coin and showing that we can be generous with cooperation (I pulled out a showy piece of bling). This changed the constraints on what the GM could author.

In a normal D&D game, there are no constraints like this on the GM's authoring of backstory, and the GM can choose to author backstory whenever they want, and as completely as they want. What @Manbearcat is saying about "only as much as is required" is actually a hard constraint the game instructs you to do because you are not supposed to be locking in details that are not prompted by play.

 

[Manbearcat]

Here is an obnoxious quip that might be instructive:

Its not that sausage is made. GM's can't avoid making sausage in TTRPGs. Its why the sausage is made, when the sausage is made, who the sausage is made for, how much sausage is made, and the nature of authority/imposed constraint around all of this (when do I get to open/close the shop, what flavors, FDA regulations, etc) "why", "when", "for whom", and "how much."

Those are essential for delineating Story Now content generation.

 

[prabe]

Specifically to engage the characters (really the players, but whatever), either by the situation itself or by attaching it to established people/places/things/events (pre-game backstory, previous pay).

As close as possible to in-play. Some things need more in the way of prior considerations than others.

Implied in the first answer, but specifically made for the characters/players, mostly in response to explicit or implicit requests.

No more than I need, always with an eye to be consistent with prior established facts and events. In-play, constrained by character success and/or failure (sometimes by degrees, especially if it's giving them information--better rolls mean more information but there's not a roll that means no information).

 

[Manbearcat]

The difference being what I just posted -- the GM isn't making things up because that's what they think should be happening, they only can the authority to improvise these things as prompted by the players and then constrained by the mechanics.

For instance, I got a 4/5 result on my check to intimidate Evonia into giving up the identity of the men. That's a result that calls for incomplete information that also introduces a clear complication. I bought that up to a 6 result (good/full info, no complication) by spending a coin and showing that we can be generous with cooperation (I pulled out a showy piece of bling). This changed the constraints on what the GM could author.

In a normal D&D game, there are no constraints like this on the GM's authoring of backstory, and the GM can choose to author backstory whenever they want, and as completely as they want. What @Manbearcat is saying about "only as much as is required" is actually a hard constraint the game instructs you to do because you are not supposed to be locking in details that are not prompted by play.

This is key. The amount of input you + system had to (a) the nature of Evonia (in the first place) and (b) your access to her is huge.

What if you failed or got a 4/5 on your Stash move with the doorman/bouncer?

What if you failed or got a 4/5 on your your doubletalk move with the Insomnia personnel (that got you access to backstage)?

Just that scene alone could have gone wildly differently in terms of content generation including the nature of Evonia. It may have come to pass that Insomnia was a front for an opposing Crew and Evonia was a high level, dangerous operator that was establishing multiple covers (and now you're in a fight with a dangerous operator backstage!)!

 

[Ovinomancer]

This is key. The amount of input you + system had to (a) the nature of Evonia (in the first place) and (b) your access to her is huge.

What if you failed or got a 4/5 on your Stash move with the doorman/bouncer?

What if you failed or got a 4/5 on your your doubletalk move with the Insomnia personnel (that got you access to backstage)?

Just that scene alone could have gone wildly differently in terms of content generation including the nature of Evonia. It may have come to pass that Insomnia was a front for an opposing Crew and Evonia was a high level, dangerous operator that was establishing multiple covers (and now you're in a fight with a dangerous operator backstage!)!

Shut your mouth!

 

[FrogReaver]

Alright. If:

a) You do it constantly (not here and there...constant, defining feature of play).

and

b) That content generation is principally bound by system premise + system say (rules, procedures, agenda, principles), and responsive to player say.

If (a) and (b) are both true? You're GMing Story Now!

So story now is basically defined by how often you improv places/NPCs into the game?

 

[Ovinomancer]

So story now is basically defined by how often you improv places/NPCs into the game?

Yes. You've got it, by Jove! Good show. I knew that if you just kept at it, and tried to understand instead of looking for simplistic gotchas, that you'd get here. Bravo!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Alright. If:

a) You do it constantly (not here and there...constant, defining feature of play).

and

b) That content generation is principally bound by system premise + system say (rules, procedures, agenda, principles), and responsive to player say.

If (a) and (b) are both true? You're GMing Story Now!

Sure. In story now there is a formal structure for this. It just is that @pemerton’s ‘backstory first’ is misleading as not having that can be a feature of many different sorts of games.