Monday, August 15, 2016

RPG Design: Player Narrative Fiat

In the 42 years since TSR published Original Dungeons & Dragons, tabletop role-playing games have seen a number of different design trends, as discussed here by John Kim.  A popular mechanic nowadays that my rules set, Sorcery & Steel, has decided not to adopt is Player Narrative Fiat.


By "Player Narrative Fiat", I mean that game resolution is not determined by one or more of the following:

  • The rules,
  • GM rulings,
  • A randomizer (e.g., dice), and/or
  • Character skills/abilities.

Positive examples of Player Narrative Fiat run the gamut from Fate Points (i.e., player narrative currency to alter the outcome of a randomizer) to full blown GM-less story games where a PC doesn't die unless the player chooses so, such as the well regarded Fiasco (2009):



So, am I saying that Player Narrative Fiat is bad?

Not at all!  However, personally, I think it flies in the face of the Old School "feel".

One might then ask, "What about close cousins, such as Force Points in d6 Star Wars?"



The distinction I draw between Force Points and Fate Points (which are mechanically identical), is that Force Points flow from the character (yes, that's a Star Wars joke) rather than the player, thus falling under the fourth bullet point above.  Similarly, I think that Willpower in the Storyteller System or a Wish spell in Old School D&D are fine.

Thus, as you might expect, my rules set, Sorcery & Steel, utilizes no Player Narrative Fiat.  In other words, while my rules set does contain some modern flourishes, the Dice Gods are still to be respected.


No comments:

Post a Comment