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 LIVE! 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: 8432168" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>This correlates, I think, to my remark upthread that there has to be a constraint imposed on outcomes - often by ignoring "Let it Ride", sometimes by even more flagrant devices - to ensure that enough of the pre-planned content survives to contribute to the framing in that final session.</p><p></p><p>This is the basis on which I contrast scenarios like The Crimson Bull, Maiden Voyage, or the 4e scenario Heathen (with a bit of cruft removed) from (say) The Speaker in Dreams or Bastion of Broken Souls. That's not to say that the latter ones are useless, but like The Prodigal Son In Chains, work is needed to prise interesting set-ups, characters, particular colourful moments, etc off the pre-determined trajectory presented by the module.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes.</p><p></p><p>But let's make it more literal <em>and</em> more technical/precise: there is a difference between <em>map as colour </em>and <em>map as a constraint on, or input into, action resolution</em>. In my Prince Valiant game, the PCs are travelling through Europe and so - for instance - have to travel through Dalmatia and Dacia before they can arrive at Constantinople overland. But that's just colour. Nothing about the process of play, the resolution techniques deployed, etc, changes based on the fact that they're making that long journey rather than travelling from (say) York to Warwick with Britain.</p><p></p><p>The same thought can apply to other contexts (ie we can step from the literal back to the figurative): If the PCs get the MacGuffin "early", <em>and </em>the plot requires them to also have spoken to the gangsters before the MacGuffin can be "cashed in" for the next step towards total victory, then instead of stealing the MacGuffin back, <em>or</em> making the players jump through gangster-related hoops, the GM can have the gangsters approach the PCs (motivated by rumours of their having obtained the MacGuffin!). Now the gangsters become colour, and perhaps a component of some over-arching framing, but not a "Pittsburgh" that needs to be explored.</p><p></p><p>I don't think [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER], or anyone else posting in this thread, is puzzled by causality, either as it operates in the real world or as we - by a type of projection - imagine it to happen in fictional worlds.</p><p></p><p>Of those two "categories" of causality, the one that is relevant to discussing agency and authority in RPGing is the causality as it operates in the real world. Ie who gets to author what, when, in accordance with what principles? It's trivial to preserve ingame causality and yet allow players to shape the fiction. My example of how to handle the MacGuffin/gangster interaction is one illustration of the point.</p><p></p><p>I tend to agree (as you know!) but think this can very across systems in a way I'll try and explain.</p><p></p><p>In Burning Wheel what you say is <em>absolutely</em> true. I think my Maiden Voyage play excerpts show how that can play out in the context of a module that presents a situation, a group of interlocking and conflictual NPCs, etc. It's why (for instance) we get one PC trying to befriend someone that someone else murders.</p><p></p><p>But Prince Valiant is a bit different. There is a default assumption, in most published scenarios, that the PCs are knights errant. Hence the situations speak to that by default; a it like DitV, perhaps, though much more light-hearted. Where the player orientation towards particular goals, allies etc arises is all within that broad framework - eg is another kinght going to be a friend or a rival; will the PCs openly oppose the wicked Duke, or reach a compromise that leaves a bad taste in the players' mouths; etc. This is why - at lesat as it seems to me - an Episodes Book makes much more sense for Prince Valiant than it would for BW.</p><p></p><p>What you describe here reminds me of Robin Laws's scenarios in the HeroWars Narrator's Book. Those are a bit more "mulitple scenes"-y than the typical Prince Valiant episode. And the way he avoids pre-scripting is by setting out multiple options that reflect multiple possible approaches by the players.</p><p></p><p>Thanks for the extended analysis and example!</p><p></p><p>My feeling is that a lot of the changes to the status quo that you describe are closer to being <em>colour</em> that doesn't really affect subsequent framing. Eg nothing changes about how the next situation unfolds <em>just because</em> the players have (eg) upended the status quo of secrecy by making a discovery. Is that fair?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8432168, member: 42582"] This correlates, I think, to my remark upthread that there has to be a constraint imposed on outcomes - often by ignoring "Let it Ride", sometimes by even more flagrant devices - to ensure that enough of the pre-planned content survives to contribute to the framing in that final session. This is the basis on which I contrast scenarios like The Crimson Bull, Maiden Voyage, or the 4e scenario Heathen (with a bit of cruft removed) from (say) The Speaker in Dreams or Bastion of Broken Souls. That's not to say that the latter ones are useless, but like The Prodigal Son In Chains, work is needed to prise interesting set-ups, characters, particular colourful moments, etc off the pre-determined trajectory presented by the module. Yes. But let's make it more literal [I]and[/I] more technical/precise: there is a difference between [I]map as colour [/I]and [I]map as a constraint on, or input into, action resolution[/I]. In my Prince Valiant game, the PCs are travelling through Europe and so - for instance - have to travel through Dalmatia and Dacia before they can arrive at Constantinople overland. But that's just colour. Nothing about the process of play, the resolution techniques deployed, etc, changes based on the fact that they're making that long journey rather than travelling from (say) York to Warwick with Britain. The same thought can apply to other contexts (ie we can step from the literal back to the figurative): If the PCs get the MacGuffin "early", [I]and [/I]the plot requires them to also have spoken to the gangsters before the MacGuffin can be "cashed in" for the next step towards total victory, then instead of stealing the MacGuffin back, [I]or[/I] making the players jump through gangster-related hoops, the GM can have the gangsters approach the PCs (motivated by rumours of their having obtained the MacGuffin!). Now the gangsters become colour, and perhaps a component of some over-arching framing, but not a "Pittsburgh" that needs to be explored. I don't think [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER], or anyone else posting in this thread, is puzzled by causality, either as it operates in the real world or as we - by a type of projection - imagine it to happen in fictional worlds. Of those two "categories" of causality, the one that is relevant to discussing agency and authority in RPGing is the causality as it operates in the real world. Ie who gets to author what, when, in accordance with what principles? It's trivial to preserve ingame causality and yet allow players to shape the fiction. My example of how to handle the MacGuffin/gangster interaction is one illustration of the point. I tend to agree (as you know!) but think this can very across systems in a way I'll try and explain. In Burning Wheel what you say is [i]absolutely[/i] true. I think my Maiden Voyage play excerpts show how that can play out in the context of a module that presents a situation, a group of interlocking and conflictual NPCs, etc. It's why (for instance) we get one PC trying to befriend someone that someone else murders. But Prince Valiant is a bit different. There is a default assumption, in most published scenarios, that the PCs are knights errant. Hence the situations speak to that by default; a it like DitV, perhaps, though much more light-hearted. Where the player orientation towards particular goals, allies etc arises is all within that broad framework - eg is another kinght going to be a friend or a rival; will the PCs openly oppose the wicked Duke, or reach a compromise that leaves a bad taste in the players' mouths; etc. This is why - at lesat as it seems to me - an Episodes Book makes much more sense for Prince Valiant than it would for BW. What you describe here reminds me of Robin Laws's scenarios in the HeroWars Narrator's Book. Those are a bit more "mulitple scenes"-y than the typical Prince Valiant episode. And the way he avoids pre-scripting is by setting out multiple options that reflect multiple possible approaches by the players. Thanks for the extended analysis and example! My feeling is that a lot of the changes to the status quo that you describe are closer to being [i]colour[/i] that doesn't really affect subsequent framing. Eg nothing changes about how the next situation unfolds [i]just because[/i] the players have (eg) upended the status quo of secrecy by making a discovery. Is that fair? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Respect Mah Authoritah: Thoughts on DM and Player Authority in 5e
Top