Results 121 to 150 of 164
-
2015-01-02, 01:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Location
- Cloud Cuckooland
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
My Homebrew
5E Mythos Kalthorros
-
2015-01-02, 03:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
Well I could say X:uses and understands representative analogies and Y: only understands and uses direct things
So I could say X: Understands that no matter what the game is fun, even with a TPK and an unfinished plot
With Y: The game is a collaborative group storytelling ring of good and positive things...oh, and fun too.
And for ''winners'' and ''losers'', my sports example works. Game one: score is kept, one team wins one losses. Game two:Each team has the same score, it's a tie...no one wins or losses. To translate that into D&D, it works like this:
GO: Hit points are rolled randomly. It's normal and ok for a 10th level character to have 20 hit points. There is no plot armor, meta plot or storytelling safeties. A player might roll bad, and have a character suddenly die.
GT:Maximum hit points at every level. Normal is max HP(plus that 18 Con). All characters have plot armor and are part of the storytelling metaplot. Rolls do not matter, the story does. The only character death is story death.
Now both types are a perfectly fine way to run a game....but I like number one.
-
2015-01-02, 03:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
False Dichotomy, but not at least you aren't flaunting number one as the BEST EV4R. (Though you Strawman the hell out of option 2 in a very passive aggressive way.)
Those are not the only two ways to run a game of d&d, and recognizing that everyone is a player (kind of, I would prefer "participant") does not doom you to one kind of game.
Example:
Everyone sits down at my table. We're buds, we're gonna play some d&d and eat cheetohs. Hell. Yes.
Players are starting at lvl 3, amd it's going to be pretty intense. So first 3 levels are max HP plus CON mod. Woot. Beyond that, HP is rolled normally and dice fall where they will. They're given a little boost at the start so that nobody is remaking characters at the very start and we don't habe a TPK first session because that's a freakin' buzzkill and a half. After that, though, all bets are off.
An hour into the game, things get tense. Things aren't looking good. The Rogue is almost dead and the Cleric is out of healing spells. The Fighter is entangled and too far away. The BBEG of this adventure is about to go whole hog. With a cry of "get rekt" he brings his mace down and kills the Rogue.
Later on, after the end of the adventure, even the DM pats Rogue player on the back. "That sucks, man. They can try to resurrect him or you can roll up something new. Your call."
A reasonable balance has been struck between making the characters tough enough to survive and feel competent in a harsh environment, and yet the dice may still spell disaster. It's not all one way or all the other.
The DM ISN'T god. Unless you're playing a campaign run by Jesus or something. (And if you are, welcome to the Playgound, Mr. Pope.)
The DM isn't even on a pedastal. He's just got heeled boots on while everyone else is in flats. He's a referee at best, no matter what attitude you choose to have about it. The actual reality doesn't change. The DM is a dude with a book who makes sure the rules are followed and tells a story, etc. That's it. That is the exact essence of the situation in reality. Claiming more than that is...dangerously egotistical and probably indicative of some kind of psychological issue(s).
-
2015-01-02, 04:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2010
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
Last edited by Arbane; 2015-01-02 at 04:13 AM.
Imagine if all real-world conversations were like internet D&D conversations...
Protip: DnD is an incredibly social game played by some of the most socially inept people on the planet - Lev
I read this somewhere and I stick to it: "I would rather play a bad system with my friends than a great system with nobody". - Trevlac
-
2015-01-02, 06:31 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
I haven't even been here that long, and I have to agree with you, Arbane.
-
2015-01-02, 11:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
A thought just came to me. There are actually games where lots of DM fiat, hostile DM, and making players compete to see who "wins and loses" is absolutely expected by participants, in which case it becomes perfectly acceptable. Examples include:
Paranoia - where the DM takes the role of an insane artificial intelligence, and part of the game is avoiding the DM's wrath. Shenanigans ensue.
Maid RPG (hilariously featured on Rollplay R&D) - where the DM takes the role of the Master, who the Maids compete to please in order to marry at the end of the game. (It's a satire of certain types of anime.)
So an addendum to my previous claim. Most players nowadays aren't looking for "God DMs" when playing most RPGs. But switch to the right RPG, and you switch to an option where most players are expecting (even looking for) it. And that makes it fine and dandy.
...A lot like if you advertise that kind of DMing style when recruiting. *hint hint*Last edited by jaydubs; 2015-01-02 at 11:59 AM.
-
2015-01-02, 02:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Location
- Maryland
- Gender
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
Paranoia really is a collection of things that you shouldn't do in other games, all lumped together for ridiculousness and humor. It's good BECAUSE of that, in the same way that jokes can often be funny because they flaunt limits, etc of what you should say.
But one wouldn't put "the players can't read the phb" for D&D, because that wouldn't make sense. And of course, trying to inject "realism" into Paranoia or whatever via complex rules is completely unnecessary. Humor vs non humor works differently.
-
2015-01-02, 11:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
I've been doing some research into the whole "Best selling roleplaying games" thing. and I've been a little bit surprised.
Firstly, by how little good math there is.
Secondly, by how often the top lists include games that utilize DM fiat a lot. For instance, this is a list made by ICV2, which is the industry monitor for sales. They get their numbers from game store owners and various distributors to see what their top selling products were. According to http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/29329.html the top options for spring of 2014 include Numenera, which I have no personal experience with but from a cursory glance looks light on crunch, and Fate Core, which is also low on crunch. D&D doesn't even show up in the top 5.
Since this is actual hard evidence from an actual industry monitor, I think we can throw the assumption that "all gamers hate fiat" right the hell out the window, since it is clearly not very well substantiated in the current state of the industry. Yes, Pathfinder sits pretty at number 1, but the top 5 is rounded out with at least two low-crunch high-fiat systems.
Unfortunately, I can't find the numbers that are associated with the list.
As of the release of 5th edition, that may change. I haven't been able to find the new figures for Winter 2014, so I think they are currently unpublished. We'll have to wait for their next statement.
Giving the site a cursory overlook, it looks like D&D has actually been below FATE core on the list since Summer 2013.
So yeah. Figures don't lie, statistics rule the day, someone actually bothered to google and cite a source, etc.
tl;dr
According to the people who rate the industry, crunch-light/fiat-heavy systems aren't actually all much behind crunchy systems in terms of sales. They are more popular than D&D right now, at least.
-
2015-01-02, 11:54 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
I think the reason those less crunchy games are popular is less "players like fiat" and more "new players don't want to read 400 pages of rules to play a social game".
I have a few gaming groups. One is 3.5 D&D players and we've been together quite awhile. We stick to rules heavy games.
The two new groups I have, which are all players new to RPGs? They don't want to play D&D. They want to play Numenera and Dungeon World, because they can learn the game and make characters in a few minutes, then focus on drinks and friends. I give them a story to follow, they don't care what decisions I make, they just want a good time with friends. No one is flipping tables because I won't let them play a half-dragon giant psion.
Now that nerdy stuff is becoming more mainstream I think there's a lot more "Dungeon World people" than there are "D&D people". Maybe 5e can convince them to come into the D&D community, but if 3.5 was still the standard there'd be no chance.
Also it's one thing to have heavy fiat in a game that markets itself as fiat heavy. It's much different to play a game that boasts freedom and then run into jedipotter.
-
2015-01-03, 12:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Location
- Wisconsin, DnD's Home
- Gender
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
All seriousness aside. *ah-hackmaster-hem*
"... people like things that are good."
-
2015-01-03, 03:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
I like that idea, and I think it points to the truest reason why most people play these games. They're social, and they're fun. The implication seemed to be that having lots of fiat is a dealbreaker-which it isn't, apparently. Or better put, "The People hate fiat." Which they apparently don't.
The amount of rules doesn't necessarily have any say in the main two principles of what makes a ttrpg enjoyable:
1. Is it fun?
2. Do you like the people you play with?
I'll play just about anything if I like the people involved. I tried Traveler because I knew the GM was a good guy. I tried d&d for the first time because I knew the players and the DM and had a free weekend.
Very few people are drawn to ttrpg's for mechanics. Much like nobody decides to play Monopoly because they heard it has a really solid ruleset.
So I agree with you in a sense, though maybe from a different angle:
Fiat-heavy or not has little bearing on what the consumers want. They want a fun game to play with buds while they eat cheetohs and get sloshed on weekends. Beyond that it's individual preference.
Similar to how all metal heads like metal...but don't necessarily like the same bands. And then argue about whether or not the drummer determines if a band is popular.
-
2015-01-03, 04:53 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- Xin-Shalast
- Gender
-
2015-01-03, 05:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Location
- Malsheem, Nessus
- Gender
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
Looking at the list, Pathfinder is obviously #1 because it's D&D 3.75 + good marketing, and FFG's Star Wars is #2 most likely because it's Star Wars; while it seems lukewarm-to-positive in popularity on the intertubes, I talked to two groups at my FLGS about EotE and all but two of them said "We'd like SWSE or WEG a lot better, but EotE is the only Star Wars game in print, so we're putting up with that."
Shadowrun likely makes #3 because SR 5e just came out, and Fate is the de facto rules-light intro game for people who aren't attached to a specific setting (where Apocalypse World and Dungeon World win out), and Shadowrun and Fate are definitely over on the crunchier side of things--Shadowrun because it's waaay crunchy, Fate because it's probably the heaviest rules-light game out there, if that makes sense. Finally, the only reason anyone seems to have heard of Numenara is that Monte Cook wrote it and there are plenty of people who try anything he wrote (and anything written by ex-D&D devs, for that matter).
So while I'm not saying EotE or Numenara are bad, and I only have anecdata and reading various forums to support my hypothesis, those two seem to be popular due to non-mechanical reasons and would sell out regardless of system because Star Wars and Monte Cook, and I've actually seen people (mostly on Reddit and EnWorld) complain that Fate is too heavy for them and they much prefer Apocalypse/Dungeon World, Risus, and similar. Mephnick's assumption that it's more likely due to lower complexity makes more sense, but even then I haven't seen any new groups (i.e. groups without that one experience gamer who pitches his favorite games) get into Numenara and Dungeon World, I've only seen them go for setting tie-in games like DFRPG (and from there to Fate Core), Mistborn, EotE, and so forth, so who knows what the real cause is.
-
2015-01-03, 01:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
I would also say that Apocolypse World might suffer from the bizarre inclusion of sex rules. Just try to play that at your game store without seeming like 'That Dude'. And like my players need more encouragement to try to sleep with NPCs.
For all of your completely and utterly honest needs. Zaydos made, Tiefling approved.
-
2015-01-03, 01:33 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
- Gender
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
Yeah, it's a real issue. IIRC, numbers on White Wolf in particular were always very hard to figure, because the company made a policy of never releasing any of its sales figures, and mostly sells books online these days, so they had to pretty much include pure guesswork.
Note that you're looking at Spring 2014 figures, there. D&D isn't showing up because D&D wasn't selling new books at the time - aside from a few novels, which are never top sellers, and re-releasing Baldur's Gate, which is a computer game, they had nothing on offer except older books.
It's also kind of a misnomer to consider Fate Core low on crunch - it's really a medium-high crunch narrative-focused game. It's not as complex as D&D, but that's largely because everyone is drawing from the same pool of powers, instead of having individual power sets for multiple classes; it's still a 300-page book, and 175 of those pages are just explaining rules and various types of conflict resolution. Between tagging, creating or modifying aspects, using stunts, claiming compels, taking stress and consequences, moving through zones, making overcome actions, and taking part in challenges and contests, there is a lot of stuff that needs to be remembered and manipulated.
*EDIT* There is a low-crunch version of Fate, mind you, but that's Fate Accelerated Edition, which clocks in at a spry 50 pages. While you'll see people recommend it a lot, it's not quite the top-seller that Fate Core is despite being substantially less expensive.Last edited by Friv; 2015-01-03 at 01:36 PM.
If you like my thoughts, you'll love my writing. Visit me at www.mishahandman.com.
-
2015-01-03, 03:46 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- Xin-Shalast
- Gender
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
-
2015-01-03, 04:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.
I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that. -- ChubbyRain
Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.
-
2015-01-03, 04:32 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
...Having an army that doubles as a harem? Well, I guess so, but its still a problem to DM for and I don't want to do logistics every dang time nor have to juggle the spotlight that much. Also, I'm not doing that near high schoolers. Just doesn't end well. And regardless of my own squeamishness, I could see it being uncomfortable or irrelevant for many groups turning them off of it. It seems like a niche game.
Last edited by Honest Tiefling; 2015-01-03 at 04:43 PM.
For all of your completely and utterly honest needs. Zaydos made, Tiefling approved.
-
2015-01-03, 06:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
-
2015-01-03, 09:36 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
It is a niche game. It's also deliberately designed to be a niche game. There are a bunch of very distinct mechanics that were guaranteed to be polarizing, there are a bunch of very distinct setting ideas that are guaranteed to be polarizing, so on and so forth. As for high schoolers, Apocalypse World is also a deliberately dark, grim game. Were it in a medium with ratings, I'd expect to see an NC-17/AO on it, even without the sexual content.
It's debatable. Aspects and Stunts rely heavily on player created content, and their usage involves a lot of active decision making - though once Stunts are established, their conditions are usually pretty clear. However, all of that is just application of the rules; I'm not sure any of it would really fit within the context of fiat. Zones also don't really involve any fiat, and mostly just involve drawing boundaries in obvious locations.
Maybe this is just a definitional difference, but the sort of "fiat" in Fate is substantially different than the sort of "DM fiat" that gets complained about. Rules are being applied, not overridden.Last edited by Knaight; 2015-01-03 at 09:41 PM.
I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.
I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that. -- ChubbyRain
Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.
-
2015-01-03, 11:18 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- Xin-Shalast
- Gender
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
-
2015-01-04, 03:33 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
So...once the rules are nonspecific enough, it's no longer fiat? Because the rules are pretty much: make it up.
and if the GM has to create opponents by hand, then every stunt and aspect held by every NPC is exactly like what the players create, so I don't actually see a functional difference. Players get to fiat one character each. Maybe two if it's that sort of campaign.
The DM fiats many characters per session, let alone per campaign.
The only difference is that these rules tell you to do so, rather than not mentioning it.
As far as I'm concerned, the only fiat people don't like is the kind that A) works against you unfairly and/or B)makes things less fun. I've never had a player complain because I let them play fast and loose with the rules because I couldn't be assed to flip through a book and waste time. I look it up before the next session and I have the rule in mind should it come up again soon, but nobody has ever complained.
I think part of what happens here is that when you start talking about DM Fiat, people start to get Confirmation Bias, which is a natural thing your brain does. Your brain won't bother to note of a time when fiat occured and it didn't affect you in any way. It's a non-event. When fiat is done that pisses you off, you take note of it because it's an event that actually caused an emotion, and a strong one at that. This isn't something that mocks or belittle anyone, by the way. It's just a human brain thing. We remember the interesting parts of our lives more than we remember each time we brush our teeth in the morning, and every flavor of toothpaste we've ever used.
Just a crackpot theory from me, but I think the majority of people who play ttrpg don't give a damn. We're in a forum where people are so into ttrpg that they scrounge through forums and argue about them. I don't think our forum is in any way an accurate depiction of the average player. (anecdotal evidence, but:) Of all the d&d and other tabletop players I know, which numbers around 15-20, I'm the only one who uses this forum. Or who goes to forums about tabletop at all.
As for the rest of the issue, it really comes down to:
Bad fiat will make people pissed at you.
Good fiat won't be noticed at all. Or might even get you kudos if it's in a casual setting and it ends up being funny.
That's pretty much all one needs to know.
-
2015-01-04, 03:36 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Location
- Houston
- Gender
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
“You know what your problem is, it's that you haven't seen enough movies - all of life's riddles are answered in the movies.” Davis. -Steve Martin- Grand Canyon
Picard management tip: Debate honestly. The goal is to arrive at the truth, not at your preconception.
-
2015-01-04, 09:42 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Location
- Material Plane
- Gender
I think it's that the good DM Fiat isn't just a good ruling but also subtle and hard for the players to even notice there was a Fiat.
I won't be completely okay with negative or positive Fiats if it's completely clear that there was a Fiat. That's even if I sometimes just sigh and let it be, knowing I should and could do something but accepting the GM's storytelling. The classic example of this is something I like to call "The GM-Escape", ie. if a bad guy runs out of the battle grid (etc.), there's no way to catch him. This can get sometimes a bit silly and breaks the immersion a bit, especially if the party happens to possess ranged weaponry and/or superior mobility but... what can you do?
Most of the times I'm against GM Fiats because they limit creativity. Some GMs seem like they attempt to paint situations where there is supposed to exist only one possible solution/path/option. Then, when someone tries something different, which would actually work by rules and elementary logic, it's suddenly impossible:
Player: "Okay, monster or no monster, I need to get to the other side of the fence and go through that portal within. The monster shouldn't be able to follow me there because it's bound to this place. One moment, let me calculate if I have enough movement..." *begins to count squares of battle grid*
GM: *rolls some dice* "Okay, as you walk through the door, the monster attacks you on its turn. Does-"
Player: "Whoa-whoa. Who said I'm going through the door. I don't want to get hit. The fence is only 15 feet high and I can fly now, so I stay clear of both the monster and the door and swoop in from the right and enter the portal. See? It's a more direct path if you fly and if I don't do anything else this turn and take the double move the monster is not near enough for even an attack of opportunity."
GM: "Uh, okay. The monster slashes at you along the way. Roll a Reflex-save."
Player: "Um, I'm not even near that monster... and aren't you thinking of an attack of opportunity?"
GM: *rolls a die* "Yeah, does 23 hit?"
Player: *sighs* "No..."
Also, most people don't tend to make the best rulings when they've been given only 10-15 seconds to think about it, without any reference to... well, anything at all. There is a reason it takes time to write a roleplaying game system.
I should also mention that I've argued against rulings that would have been beneficial to the party but that didn't make sense no matter how you look at them.Last edited by Raimun; 2015-01-04 at 09:52 PM.
Signatures are so 90's.
-
2015-01-04, 11:21 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
The rules for creating aspects fit within some very broad advice, stunts are a lot more specific. Both tie into a skill system that is very concrete in how it handles, and when it comes to actually using aspects there are three predefined methods which are picked between. There's no fiat involved there.
I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.
I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that. -- ChubbyRain
Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.
-
2015-01-04, 11:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
Saying ''limits creativity'' is a bit harsh. A Dm at any second can do anything, even ''within the non-existent game rules'', as that is what the DM does.
This is a good example of a bad DM. Note:
1. The DM created everything about the encounter
2. The DM controls everything about the encounter
3. The DM can change anything about the encounter
So first off, the DM could have stated ''the portal is closed'' and given the normal way to open it. This stops the ''fly through''. The DM could have the portal need a key. The DM could have the portal tied to the monsters life force: monster dies, portal opens (the sneaky villain uses the wand of feign death to fool the portal). Or other such things to make the encounter harder.
And even if the DM is caught ''off guard'' it's easy to have ''in game back-ups''. For example the whole area around the portal is a no-fly zone with a ''Earthbind spell effect'' that blocks fliers. And should a player complain the DM just needs to point to the DMG where it says ''the DM can do custom effects, things and stuff.''
Giving the monster a sudden and spontaneous ranged ability is also a great thing to do. (Though the good DM would have included this in the creation). And the players never need know the monster did not have the ranged ability back on Monday when the DM made the monster. As long as the DM does not say something like ''out of nowhere a crossbow pops into the monsters hand and it shots the bolt!'' and the DM more just has the monster ''breathe a jet of fire'' or ''fire an arcane bolt of energy'', as both can be explained under ''player interrogation'' by templates or class abilities.
-
2015-01-05, 12:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
Alternately, the PC can just get to the portal, because they came up with a workable strategy for the situation presented. Continued advancement will probably be more difficult, as a GM just considering the setting would realize that someone thought guarding a portal with a bound creature that can't actually reach it and has no ranged attacks was a good idea, and that someone is probably either going to learn from their failure or (if they're an underling of some sort) get replaced.
I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.
I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that. -- ChubbyRain
Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.
-
2015-01-05, 12:40 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Location
- Toledo, Ohio
- Gender
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
Let's look at a pair of GM-fiats from my last campaign, and how my players reacted. Blue text in this case is scene setting, red is things the player does not know. (from memory, so details might be fuzzy, and this is a VTT game)
#1
The party bard has been raised to the nobility in two of the setting's three main empires, and is a central player in keeping the thrones securely in the hands of responsible rulers that can be counted on in the coming apocalyptic crisis. The party is ambushed in an alley by heavily armed warriors, that ping heavily on detect magic.. This is a party of expertly trained assassins from a near-legendary assassins guild that allegedly never fails and commands astronomical prices per hit that has been hired specifically to eliminate the troublesome bard, and knows practically everything about him.
Bard: I try to convince them to go away. (rolls extremely high on Diplomacy)
Me: He ignores your attempt. He simply asks if you are [bard's name]. Because they were going after an extremely charismatic bard that was known for talking his way out of things, in addition to complete immunity to enchantment spells a spell had been placed on them to make them immune to persuasion by continous reinforcement of their primary order.
Bard: I tell him that I am.
Me: They all attack
Bard: (on his turn) I use [signature spell]. He used the same spell so much they knew he would use it, so had a targeted anti-that-spell-field.
Me: The attack does nothing.
The bard throws a fit, they manage to win the fight, and the game goes on.
#2
The party's cleric is a templated creature that radiates light, and the party has never encountered another one of his kind. The race that the player had chosen did not exist in the campaign world, but when I okayed his character sheet I knew that it would be very appropriate for a plot twist down the line, so he wasn't told this. The party is in an ancient ruin that has been maintained as a semi-religious shrine. I take control of his character suddenly.
Me: [Cleric] gets up and walks down the hall. [Cleric] cries out in a strange language and the wall opens, revealing a dark passage. It (the cleric had been wrapped in heavily concealing garments, so nobody had any idea what it looked like) strides boldy forward.
The party follows.
Me: [Cleric] leads you to a ancient golden door, which opens at a touch. There are a number of weapons on pedestals here, and [cleric] touches each in turn, each time speaking a word in that same strange language. Each of the weapons was forged by a god, and had been carried by great champions in an ancient War In Heaven. Since only a weapon forged by a god in this world can harm a god, and they were opposing an ancient evil god, this was very important. It stops at a great silver bow.
Me: (whispers to cleric) You find yourself in a dusty room full of weapons, with no idea how you got there.
Cleric: Where am I? What's this bow? (Picks it up)
Me: (whispers to cleric) when you pick up the bow, you realize that most of your early memories are false, and you are not what you think you are. You have memories of a great palace, and six kin that were sealed away with you. You also realize that you have great power still sealed within you. When the evil goddess won the Godwar millenia before, she used raw primal chaos to seal the other gods away from the material plane. After a mortal hero slew her in the Titan War some uncertain time later (40,000 years before the campaign), the gods decided to take precautions in case she was resurrected and repeated the feat. They sealed seven archangels away in the mortal realm, six of which had been found and killed. I had decided early on that our strange cleric was the seventh one, who's sealing had failed (the only reason that it's location had not been found) with the side effect of severe amnesia.
Some IC chatter later, the session came to an end.
Received a PM from the cleric's player after the game, thanking me for throwing his character concept away, and that he had already figured out [cleric] shouldn't exist, and had been wondering what was up.
Both situations either were or appeared to be pure railroading fiat (depending on your definition), but one player was furious (until they managed to dig up a bit more information about what was going on), while the other was delighted. It's a tricky thing to get right.Last edited by Gnoman; 2015-01-05 at 12:41 AM.
-
2015-01-05, 12:53 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
-
2015-01-05, 01:39 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
Re: Why is DM Fiat considered a Very Bad Thing?™
...it's not having a "free pass", it's solving the problem without having to kill the monster. If the monster was a wolf, for example, would you give it opposable thumbs and a bow with DM fiat because you were mad that they managed to tabletop-rpg their way past your little encounter? That's why I play these, because they let the players do things even the creator didn't come up with, so long as they're reasonable.
Sure, there comes a time where things shouldn't always be this easy. But to constantly move the goalposts just to make the players feel like they can't use lateral thinking to solve the problem because the problem always dodges their solution is what we're calling out here.