• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D General When (or if?) the FICTION is out to get you??

Do you think it's possible for that to not be the case???

Another obvious source is the die, or any other randomizer that is used to determine outcomes. Of course, the DM lacks direct control over this but also exercises control in the long term through statistics.

DMs may outsource responsibility, in the form of a published adventure or any other type of established lore.

Players are another source of fiction. And non-players, too. Anyone who interacts with the DM, players, or the game, whether directly or indirectly, could affect fiction in a myriad of ways.

Subconscious influences also exist. Players and DM alike may follow tropes and trends without intending to, influenced by anything from cultural upbringing to blood sugar levels.

And perhaps our navels are a source. Only further contemplation will tell.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

That's not what's up for discussion here. When you say, "the story is out to get them" - most of that is cleanly traceable back to the GM, even if the GM isn't forcing a particular direction.
Do you think it's possible for that to not be the case???

Anything is possible. But those situations are memorable for their rarity. Here's the two times I can remember experiencing it over 30+ years of gaming:

E.g. A VtM campaign, the GM had an npc intended to be helpful. They had a rich backstory deeply woven into the plot, so it couldn't readily be changed. By pure chance, for like 8 character-defining historical events, my character was on the opposite side. We were (unintentionally) ideological enemies. It...did not go well.

Another time the tables were reversed. I was GMing and an npc I intended to be honor-bound to hep the PCs was antagonized into being honor-bound to be their enemy. The players made a barely plausible assumption the npc was the baddie, publicly harassed and insulted them and then, through a series of bad die rolls and player overzealousness, burned down the npc's family home. They had also managed to spend all their cash on healing potions (which they used to survive the fire) so they were flat broke.

I have seen the reverse, where an NPC intended to be an enemy was just totally flipped to the PCs side when a character did something on a whim that was that 1-in-a-million event needed to at least keep them neutral.

The monk deciding to befriend an Acolyte of the Skin rather than treat their skulking behavior as a sign of malice. (Which, BTW, it was.) The dice just kept making his attempts to understand the Acolyte's life decisions and yet not judge them be so earnest and guilleless that it totally shifted a major plot arc.
 
Last edited:


I look at this differently.

I fill two roles. One is creative. One is administrative.

For the creative role I am inserting elements into my game. I am designing an NPC, a location, a spell, an encounter, etc... I try to do creative elements early so they are proactive, and not reactive. I am trying to create things that will then be handled by my second administrative role. When I do this role I am creating elements that will play a role in fun challenges the PCs may encounter. I'm an architect of the game.

The administrative role takes a creation and attempts to unbiasedly implement the concept envisioned by using the rules and motivations of the creations themselves. It is not worried about what the PCs and players want - that concern was addressed during creation. I'm trying to be an impartial and fair tule that implements the world as written. This role just goes with the flow and implements what is created. I'm the contractor following the plans. The odd thing is that this 'less creative' administration is often the source of the greatest innovations in my game ... but the innovations come from how the PCs interact with the established elements of the game and redirect the narrative by making it theirs.

You might ask why isn't the administrative role concerned with the fun of the players? Because if we unfairly help or hurt players through the administration of the game, you take the player role out of the game. If the PCs have a string of bad luck and the monsters decide to take it easy on them ... the PCs were never at risk. They were going to win regardless of what they did. All that die rolling ... all the decisions they made ... none of it matters. You're just playing a game by yourself as a DM and making the players a captive audience. This is a phenomena I call DMasturbation ... you're really just playing with yourself.

No DM can perfectly implement these approaches. You've need to be creative in the moment, at times, when players do the unexpected. You'll need to make administrative decisions with no real concrete rules, motivations or tools established ... which means needing to select something based either on pure luck ... or perhaps taking an opportunity to make the story better in the moment by taking something that should have been administrative and reactive and instead making it creative. We do not always hit the target ... but these approaches are the targets I use and they serve me well.
 

When I DM, I don't want to get or not get the PCs. I, ideally, am a conduit of the fiction, and it gets (or not gets) the PCs on its terms. Who else operates like this? Care to share example??
Sure:
  • Paranoia
  • Ravenloft
  • Tomb of Horrors
  • Alien
  • Call of Cthulhu/Delta Green
  • Dread
  • 10 Candles
  • DCC
  • Mork Borg
  • Queen of the Demonweb Pits
  • Steading of the Hill Giant Chief
There's plenty more. In most of the above, the GM's job is to keep the party alive as long as possible :ROFLMAO:
 

Another obvious source is the die, or any other randomizer that is used to determine outcomes. Of course, the DM lacks direct control over this but also exercises control in the long term through statistics.
or the short term, if I put three ancient red dragons in front of a level 1 party then the dice won’t save them.

The DM can always stack the odds to the point where the randomizer no longer is significant (for or against the players). So if you want to be sure the DM had no ‘thumb on the scales’ then you need to cut off the DM’s ‘thumb’ by things being outside the control of the DM and only controlled by the game mechanics.
 

or the short term, if I put three ancient red dragons in front of a level 1 party then the dice won’t save them.

The DM can always stack the odds to the point where the randomizer no longer is significant (for or against the players). So if you want to be sure the DM had no ‘thumb on the scales’ then you need to cut off the DM’s ‘thumb’ by things being outside the control of the DM and only controlled by the game mechanics.
Never happen. If there's a GM, there's GM Fiat.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top