D&D General When (or can) the fiction overrides the DM?

[GMforPowergamers]

On occasion, we bring up the topic of the "fiction" of the game. On how it should be what drives the game. If the fiction is the greatest driver of the game, does that mean it should overrides the DM. Have you ever wanted to do something as the DM but stopped yourself because of the fiction? But wouldn't you consider that the DM is the highest level source of fiction? I'm not sure what the answer is; what do you all think???

yes and no...

yes I have had moments that I wanted my game to have something happen, but it didn't make sense in the moment.

no, because I have enough control of the narrative that if I really want something I can force it.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Many authors have said something to the effect that as they get deeper into a novel, the story starts "writing itself." Characters will do things that were unplanned and unexpected, and ideas just come seemingly out of nowhere.

JMS has 2 great stories from Babylon 5... but the one that I remember best is the death of a character.

as an almost throw away episode he wrote a machine that could drain someones life force to realive another who was on deaths door. He also wrote a character as totally head over heals in love with another character (played for laughs alot). He however also wrote that same character as a big damn hero who was willing to die for what he beleived in...

so he wrote the scene where the person was laying there dieing... and everyone was sad... and they were supposed to die. Then his mind would not let him type it... instead the other big damn hero stole teh machine sacraficed himself and saved the other... keep in mind the now dead character had plots to go, and the one now alive did not have pre planned plots.

could he have just said "and then she died" sure... but it felt right in the moment to say "He saves her" then that just rewrote the narrative.


I have had NPCs that this (not exact) thing has happened with.

 

[the Jester]

On occasion, we bring up the topic of the "fiction" of the game. On how it should be what drives the game. If the fiction is the greatest driver of the game, does that mean it should overrides the DM. Have you ever wanted to do something as the DM but stopped yourself because of the fiction? But wouldn't you consider that the DM is the highest level source of fiction? I'm not sure what the answer is; what do you all think???

I find the notion of the fiction overriding the DM to be stifling and irritating, to be honest. If the "fiction" is the driving force, you shouldn't be playing a game, you should be writing a story. In a game, the fiction is the story you tell about what happened when you played the game. In other words, the story emerges from play, it doesn't dictate play. It comes after the game. I feel very strongly that fiction-first approaches have a much better outlet for achieving a good story than running a game: tell or write a good story. You don't need dice (or players) for that. It's a fundamentally different thing than playing a game.

 

[Celebrim]

I find the notion of the fiction overriding the DM to be stifling and irritating, to be honest.

I don't think you understand what is meant by "fiction" in this context. It's not a story or plot or narrative or anything like that. In game design jargon, the narrative is the story. The fiction is simply the in game situation.

For example, "You open the door. On the other side you see a square room about 10 paces across. On the far side of the room, on a pedestal, is a pie. In the center of the room is a snarling orc with a two-handed battleaxe" is "the fiction".

The players then ask questions about the fiction or propose to make a change in the fiction through their character's in game actions.

 

[Maxperson]

On occasion, we bring up the topic of the "fiction" of the game. On how it should be what drives the game. If the fiction is the greatest driver of the game, does that mean it should overrides the DM. Have you ever wanted to do something as the DM but stopped yourself because of the fiction? But wouldn't you consider that the DM is the highest level source of fiction? I'm not sure what the answer is; what do you all think???

This has never happened to me, but mostly because I try to inhabit the fiction as much as I can as both DM and player, so I don't try things that wouldn't work in the fiction.

 

[the Jester]

I don't think you understand what is meant by "fiction" in this context. It's not a story or plot or narrative or anything like that. In game design jargon, the narrative is the story. The fiction is simply the in game situation.

For example, "You open the door. On the other side you see a square room about 10 paces across. On the far side of the room, on a pedestal, is a pie. In the center of the room is a snarling orc with a two-handed battleaxe" is "the fiction".

The players then ask questions about the fiction or propose to make a change in the fiction through their character's in game actions.

Perhaps, but the whole "overriding the DM" thing doesn't seem to match up with that.

 

[Oofta]

When I DM I set up the world, the factions, put obstacles and goals out there for the PCs to pursue. As the game progresses, the players make decisions and help shape the campaign. The players and the decisions and actions of the PCs are big drivers of the ongoing narrative.

There are limitations to what the PCs can do. By and large they have to abide by the rules of the game. I don't run strictly by the book, but you do have to color between the lines. More or less. There are other limitations such as clerics can't just pop up to Valhalla to have lunch with their buddy Odin. They can't just announce that because they have a noble background they summon an army to solve their problems.

The only way the PCs can alter the world around them to a large degree is by their words, actions or inactions. They can, and are encouraged to, fill in details about their background and relationships but I get veto power and let them know the constraints that make sense for the world. Ideally we have background and an outline of who the PC is and where they came from before the campaign even starts, but even then I have final control over any NPC they create. A player can tell me how a parent might be likely to respond, but I'm the one that runs the NPC, not the player.

So can it happen? Sure. If the DM and group want, the players can help build the world. I take input and suggestions all the time, but I'm the final arbiter. I don't see either approach as being good or bad, I just have my style because I have a persistent campaign world and I want it to make sense not only in context of the current campaign but also in context with past and potential future campaigns. Collaborative fiction/world building to me would work better if the campaign world was created specifically for a campaign.

 

[Celebrim]

Perhaps, but the whole "overriding the DM" thing doesn't seem to match up with that.

The idea is essentially, having established a fiction, can the DM change his mind and invent a new fiction on the fly. For example, everyone agrees that it would be good if the climactic fight of an adventure was dramatic and cinematic. Those sort of situations create memorable experiences for all involved. So suppose under whatever game engine you are using, in the orc and pie module above, the orc wins initiative charges forward and rolls a failure with consequences result, tripping over his own feet and falling on his face where he is easily then dispatched by the party with a single stab.

Can the GM or more importantly ought the GM accept this result ("fiction rules over the GM") or ought the GM to then do something like, "A secret door opens in the room, and two more orcs spill into the room screaming battle cries and swinging their axes." when in fact the GM knows that no such secret door or orcs existed in the fiction until the moment the climactic battle of the adventure fizzled?

 

[the Jester]

The idea is essentially, having established a fiction, can the DM change his mind and invent a new fiction on the fly. For example, everyone agrees that it would be good if the climactic fight of an adventure was dramatic and cinematic. Those sort of situations create memorable experiences for all involved. So suppose under whatever game engine you are using, in the orc and pie module above, the orc wins initiative charges forward and rolls a failure with consequences result, tripping over his own feet and falling on his face where he is easily then dispatched by the party with a single stab.

Can the GM or more importantly ought the GM accept this result ("fiction rules over the GM") or ought the GM to then do something like, "A secret door opens in the room, and two more orcs spill into the room screaming battle cries and swinging their axes." when in fact the GM knows that no such secret door or orcs existed in the fiction until the moment the climactic battle of the adventure fizzled?

Sure, he can, but then why is the group rolling dice?

The example of "we want a big climactic battle" really doesn't change my answer. If you want a big climactic battle, set it up that way in the first place, instead of setting it up where the outcome can fall literally flat like you describe. If you don't like that possibility, set up the encounter to preclude it. If you set it up as described, accept the outcome that the dice give you.

EDIT: This reminds me of a moment in my 3.5 game when a high level cleric faced off with, I don't remember, some mighty fiend or other. The fiend talked smack, the cleric talked smack, they rolled for initiative, and the cleric killed the fiend on round 1 with a destruction spell. Afterward, several of my players expressed how much they liked it that I didn't arbitrarily decide to do what you've described and either throw in more bad guys to make the fight more exciting or fudge that he made his save. The fact that a fight can end suddenly and abruptly, with a total victory for one side, and I'll let the dice stand seems to be a strength in our playstyle.

 

[Celebrim]

Sure, he can, but then why is the group rolling dice?

The example of "we want a big climactic battle" really doesn't change my answer. If you want a big climactic battle, set it up that way in the first place, instead of setting it up where the outcome can fall literally flat like you describe. If you don't like that possibility, set up the encounter to preclude it. If you set it up as described, accept the outcome that the dice give you.

So it sounds like you are firmly in the "fiction can override the GM" camp.