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
*Dungeons & Dragons
Respect Mah Authoritah: Thoughts on DM and Player Authority in 5e
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 8431482" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>In this thread there has been reference by more than one poster (most recently [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER] just upthread) to a "spectrum" which has sandboxes at one end.</p><p></p><p>I think this is an unhelpful and even misleading confusion. It makes discussion of authority over the fiction harder than it needs to be.</p><p></p><p>So just to be clear: there is a spectrum on which colours lie - I'm not any sort of expert, and tend to suck both as visual artist and critic, but in my mind I can conjure up a spectrum that runs from yellow through orange to red.</p><p></p><p>Some spectrums are more metaphorical than literal: we might say that there is a metaphorical spectrum from square through pentagon through hexagon through . . . through chiliagon . . . all the way to a circle.</p><p></p><p>I personally struggle to think of even a metaphorical spectrum that has a triangle at one end and a square at the other.</p><p></p><p>And cars, trucks, and bicycles are all land vehicles but I don't think they sit on a spectrum at all.</p><p></p><p>So:</p><p></p><p>A <em>sandbox </em>involves predominant, even exclusive, GM authority over <em>setting </em>and<em> backstory</em>. (Maybe players contribute some backstory at PC gen, which they and the GM weave into the GM's notes about the setting.)</p><p></p><p>Many of the GM's setting elements - lairs, prisons, political factions, etc - have latent <em>situations</em> in them.</p><p></p><p>The players "activate" these situations by declaring the appropriate actions - eg that their PCs <em>cross the hills to find the dragon cave </em>or that their PCs <em>talk to the mayor to try and secure her support in their attempt to overthrow the Baron</em>.</p><p></p><p>So the players and the GM share situational authority, in the asymmetric fashion just described.</p><p></p><p>As far as action resolution is concerned, the GM - if they are not going to be self-defeating - has to be generous and permissive in adjudicating the "activating" actions. How other actions are adjudicated, and whether "Let it Ride" applies, is a different thing. I can certainly conceive of a GM who is very protective of his/her sandbox and so makes sure that player-declared actions don't really do much to <em>change </em>the setting (ie Let it Ride does not apply, and the GM manipulates the background fiction to negate possible significant consequences of PC actions).</p><p></p><p>Now consider the typical <em>"linear" adventure</em> - in D&D terms there are many of these, but Speaker in Dreams (a 3E module) is as good an example as any. In these adventures the GM also exercises backstory authority. The GM also exercises situational authority. And - related to this - whereas the sandbox GM should be very permissive in adjudication of "situation activating" actions, the GM of the linear adventure wants to discourage any such actions which might activate situations that have not already been planned/prepared for - either by express metagame requests to the players, or by using in-fiction techniques to discourage them (eg lots of "There be dragons" signposting), or by using adjudication techniques to block them (such as fiat declarations of failure; stuff like anti-teleport zones is probably on the line between in-fiction and adjudication-based techniques). And in a linear adventure Let it Ride <em>can't </em>apply, because the GM is committed to presenting the upcoming situations whatever the PCs' actions (subject to extreme unavoidable changes in the fiction like detonating a bomb - those actions also risk detonating a metaphorical bomb at the gaming table!).</p><p></p><p>So we can already see that there is no "spectrum" here, just different allocations of authority.</p><p></p><p>Now consider (say) Apocalypse World. The backstory authority is shared, as part of PC build. The GM exercises situational authority, exercised in accordance with the principles of the game. These include <em>ask questions and build on the answers</em>, which can mean taking significant suggestions and input on both backstory and situation during the course of play (eg the GM might ask player X, <em>so why is Isle so mad at you? </em>and then the player has to make up some appropriate bit of backstory which also helps inform the character of the current situation). The integrity of action resolution in AW is of course sacrosanct.</p><p></p><p>Again, no spectrum. Just different allocations of authority.</p><p></p><p>EDIT: I've just read [USER=7030042]@Composer99[/USER]'s post not too far upthread. I'm curious how much Composer99 thinks our descriptions of "linear adventure" differ - eg am I describing only a degenerate case? That wasn't my intention, and I don't think I am, but maybe I've missed something!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8431482, member: 42582"] In this thread there has been reference by more than one poster (most recently [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER] just upthread) to a "spectrum" which has sandboxes at one end. I think this is an unhelpful and even misleading confusion. It makes discussion of authority over the fiction harder than it needs to be. So just to be clear: there is a spectrum on which colours lie - I'm not any sort of expert, and tend to suck both as visual artist and critic, but in my mind I can conjure up a spectrum that runs from yellow through orange to red. Some spectrums are more metaphorical than literal: we might say that there is a metaphorical spectrum from square through pentagon through hexagon through . . . through chiliagon . . . all the way to a circle. I personally struggle to think of even a metaphorical spectrum that has a triangle at one end and a square at the other. And cars, trucks, and bicycles are all land vehicles but I don't think they sit on a spectrum at all. So: A [I]sandbox [/I]involves predominant, even exclusive, GM authority over [I]setting [/I]and[I] backstory[/I]. (Maybe players contribute some backstory at PC gen, which they and the GM weave into the GM's notes about the setting.) Many of the GM's setting elements - lairs, prisons, political factions, etc - have latent [I]situations[/I] in them. The players "activate" these situations by declaring the appropriate actions - eg that their PCs [I]cross the hills to find the dragon cave [/I]or that their PCs [I]talk to the mayor to try and secure her support in their attempt to overthrow the Baron[/I]. So the players and the GM share situational authority, in the asymmetric fashion just described. As far as action resolution is concerned, the GM - if they are not going to be self-defeating - has to be generous and permissive in adjudicating the "activating" actions. How other actions are adjudicated, and whether "Let it Ride" applies, is a different thing. I can certainly conceive of a GM who is very protective of his/her sandbox and so makes sure that player-declared actions don't really do much to [I]change [/I]the setting (ie Let it Ride does not apply, and the GM manipulates the background fiction to negate possible significant consequences of PC actions). Now consider the typical [I]"linear" adventure[/I] - in D&D terms there are many of these, but Speaker in Dreams (a 3E module) is as good an example as any. In these adventures the GM also exercises backstory authority. The GM also exercises situational authority. And - related to this - whereas the sandbox GM should be very permissive in adjudication of "situation activating" actions, the GM of the linear adventure wants to discourage any such actions which might activate situations that have not already been planned/prepared for - either by express metagame requests to the players, or by using in-fiction techniques to discourage them (eg lots of "There be dragons" signposting), or by using adjudication techniques to block them (such as fiat declarations of failure; stuff like anti-teleport zones is probably on the line between in-fiction and adjudication-based techniques). And in a linear adventure Let it Ride [I]can't [/I]apply, because the GM is committed to presenting the upcoming situations whatever the PCs' actions (subject to extreme unavoidable changes in the fiction like detonating a bomb - those actions also risk detonating a metaphorical bomb at the gaming table!). So we can already see that there is no "spectrum" here, just different allocations of authority. Now consider (say) Apocalypse World. The backstory authority is shared, as part of PC build. The GM exercises situational authority, exercised in accordance with the principles of the game. These include [I]ask questions and build on the answers[/I], which can mean taking significant suggestions and input on both backstory and situation during the course of play (eg the GM might ask player X, [I]so why is Isle so mad at you? [/I]and then the player has to make up some appropriate bit of backstory which also helps inform the character of the current situation). The integrity of action resolution in AW is of course sacrosanct. Again, no spectrum. Just different allocations of authority. EDIT: I've just read [USER=7030042]@Composer99[/USER]'s post not too far upthread. I'm curious how much Composer99 thinks our descriptions of "linear adventure" differ - eg am I describing only a degenerate case? That wasn't my intention, and I don't think I am, but maybe I've missed something! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Respect Mah Authoritah: Thoughts on DM and Player Authority in 5e
Top