Quote from: The Traveller;625563How is that even possible, unless the GM straps the players to their chairs and holds their mothers hostage? The GM never has total power, the GM has power delineated in certain peculiar but defineable ways.

Gm has final say.

What did you think I meant?

Quote from: Bill;625564Gm has final say.

What did you think I meant?

The GM doesn't have final say. As I said in the OP:

"The GM has more power than the group, right? He or she can summon ten million death demons to kill the group and take their stuff on a whim? Wrong.

The GM cannot force the group to do anything, charm spells notwithstanding. The group cannot force the GM to do anything. In the ultimate extremity, the group can simply decide to walk away from the table."

It's a self apparent truism. Not knowing this truism and misunderstanding of the 'power' of a GM leads to pointless conflict. Does the GM in most circumstances act as the translator of the combined rules/setting space? Yes, although I haven't addressed that fully yet. Does the GM have 'total power'? No.

Quote from: The Traveller;625569The GM doesn't have final say. As I said in the OP:

"The GM has more power than the group, right? He or she can summon ten million death demons to kill the group and take their stuff on a whim? Wrong.

The GM cannot force the group to do anything, charm spells notwithstanding. The group cannot force the GM to do anything. In the ultimate extremity, the group can simply decide to walk away from the table."

It's a self apparent truism. Not knowing this truism and misunderstanding of the 'power' of a GM leads to pointless conflict. Does the GM in most circumstances act as the translator of the combined rules/setting space? Yes, although I haven't addressed that fully yet. Does the GM have 'total power'? No.

I don't really agree, but we may just be defining things differently.

The gm does have total power.

Bad gm's abuse it.

Good gm's use the minimum of that power required to make the game work.

Where we likely agree is that a gm can't abuse power without pissing off players.

Quote from: Bill;625576Where we likely agree is that a gm can't abuse power without pissing off players.

...so the GM doesn't have total power. There is an extraneous factor here in that the players are not subject to the whims of a GM, and this is a reality it is neccessary to incorporate when understanding the role of the GM.

The entire hobby in objective terms can be seperated into six elements.

• The GM
• The characters
• The players
• The rules
• The setting (also incorporating the genre and mood)
• The dice (most wouldn't include that but for reasons previously and yet to be specified I have)

If we are to understand the role of a GM fully we must understand the GMs interactions with each of these elements. Excluding any of them must neccessarily therefore lead to an incomplete and hence useless definition.

Quote from: beermonk;625412Look around your table. Are your players having fun? Are they excited to play week after week or whenever? Are they coming up with interesting tidbits of background information for their characters that may never be used? Do they draw pictures or download art and say, 'this is what my dude looks like..."

'The role of the referee it to produce these results!' Great, thanks again, Captain Obvious.

Quote from: beermonk;625412Your answer in regards to 'how' is something for another discussion.

Is it, now?

Are you seriously arguing that the role of the referee is produce an outcome but how a referee goes about performing that role has no bearing on the discussion?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;625583'The role of the referee it to produce these results!' Great, thanks again, Captain Obvious.


Is it, now?

Are you seriously arguing that the role of the referee is produce an outcome but how a referee goes about performing that role has no bearing on the discussion?

Are you retarded?

If you can't figure out how to have fun in YOUR game with YOUR players without someone instructing you how to do it, then perhaps games like Boggle, UNO, and Connect 4 might be a better gateway drug for you before you jump into the real serious and heavy stuff such as RPGs with all their 'rules' and 'odd sided dice' and tough and impenetrable formulas for fun!

OMG! It's so difficult! The fun! How do I haz it?

Quote from: beermonk;625744Are you retarded?

If you can't figure out how to have fun in YOUR game with YOUR players without someone instructing you how to do it, then perhaps games like Boggle, UNO, and Connect 4 might be a better gateway drug for you before you jump into the real serious and heavy stuff such as RPGs with all their 'rules' and 'odd sided dice' and tough and impenetrable formulas for fun!

OMG! It's so difficult! The fun! How do I haz it?

I think he was objecting to your facile "the GM makes FUN!" statement. Which I completely agree with, it's just not very helpful when trying to pin down what the GM actually focuses on in a game to deliver the experience. If (like me) you're pretty comfortable with how you GM and the results you get, then this discussion probably isn't for you (or me).

There are whole screeds of text on what a GM does at the table--rightly or wrongly, White Wolf practically made an industry out of it.

Quote from: The Traveller;625580...so the GM doesn't have total power.

.....
Ok it is obvious that you somehow define "7" as max volume even though the volume really goes to 10, because 8, 9 and 10 is too uncomfortable.

But, to refer to your definitions of Elements, the Setting may in some cases require that you as a GM even crank it up to 11 .... while some settings may only manage max 5.
Not to mention Players that act out .. or doesn't act out, or are sensitive ... this also affects the effective "power volume" that is required and possible.

Quote from: The Traveller;625580There is an extraneous factor here in that the players are not subject to the whims of a GM, and this is a reality it is neccessary to incorporate when understanding the role of the GM.

The entire hobby in objective terms can be seperated into six elements.

• The GM
• The characters
• The players
• The rules
• The setting (also incorporating the genre and mood)
• The dice (most wouldn't include that but for reasons previously and yet to be specified I have)

If we are to understand the role of a GM fully we must understand the GMs interactions with each of these elements. Excluding any of them must neccessarily therefore lead to an incomplete and hence useless definition.

The Players are not subject to the whims of the GM, but their Player Characters are. That is what Bill referred to as "Total Power".

Using words like judge and referee is not "handwaving", it is explaining.

Including the dice as an element? ... I'm guessing it is due to the possibility of hidden die rolls and fudging die rolls.

It'll be interesting to see where this goes ...

Quote from: Catelf;625766.....
Ok it is obvious that you somehow define "7" as max volume even though the volume really goes to 10, because 8, 9 and 10 is too uncomfortable.

But, to refer to your definitions of Elements, the Setting may in some cases require that you as a GM even crank it up to 11 .... while some settings may only manage max 5.
Not to mention Players that act out .. or doesn't act out, or are sensitive ... this also affects the effective "power volume" that is required and possible.

I don't understand what you're saying here.

Quote from: Catelf;625766The Players are not subject to the whims of the GM, but their Player Characters are. That is what Bill referred to as "Total Power".

Even the player characters are not fully subject to the whims of the GM, since they operate with the co-operation of the players. We can't take one element and exclude its interactions with the others, we're left with half the picture.

Of the six elements I listed, the GM only has total power over two, that would be the setting and the GM. And even the setting is somewhat arguable.

The GM has partial or shared power over the characters and the rules. This power is shared with the players and the dice.

The GM has no power over anything else.

Quote from: Catelf;625766Using words like judge and referee is not "handwaving", it is explaining.

No, it's handwaving because it is a case of simply reaching for the nearest approximation. Trying to apply this approximation directly to the role of the GM leads to bad calls and bad gaming, even with the best of intentions. We can do better.

Quote from: Catelf;625766Including the dice as am element? ... I'm guessing it is due to the possibility of hidden die rolls and fudging die rolls.

There are a lot of reasons for including the dice as a distinct element, I've gone over some above, but basically the dice are a factor that nobody has control over, which is important when we're talking about the GM and how GMs interact with the other elements.

Quote from: The Traveller;625767I don't understand what you're saying here.

Of course you don't.
I'll try to explain it better:
The GM has power as a GM.
This power is at 100 % = Total Power.
However, normally it is not adviceable to use more than 50 - 60%, or the players will get pissed.
Therfor, you define 60% as "Total Power" .... since that is what normally can be used.

However, Horror-settings and similar, may really increase the amount of power that can be used, because it relies on the unknown, and even discomfort, so the players will not get as pissed off if one of them temporarily turns into an NPC due to possession, insanity, or even just panic.
In that case, the "Power adviceable to use" may reach 80, 90, or even a 100%.

Quote from: The Traveller;625767No, it's handwaving because it is a case of simply reaching for the nearest approximation. Trying to apply this approximation directly to the role of the GM leads to bad calls and bad gaming, even with the best of intentions. We can do better.

"Nearest approximation".
The only thing that currently can describe a GM's role, if we don't use approximations, is "To be a GM".
The idea is to list the closest approximations, in order to explain the role of a GM, to mesh them together, or there will just be:
A GM's role is to be the GM.
And i am certain you want a better explanation than that.

As for the "Dispute things":
I dispute that the GM is unquestionably a part of the group.
Thing is, In one way, The GM IS a part of the Gaming Group.
But during the game, in the game, the GM is also clearly NOT a part of the group, since the roles of the GM is so diverse from the players.
However.
You have already made that distinction by placing the GM as a seperate Element ... so of course you don't have to point it out a second time, thereby the GM is a part of the gaming group ... but the GM is also a seperate Element from the players ...
Hmm...
As you see, i reasoned myself forward to that you were right, because i understood how you probably is thinking about it.

In a way, this whole post is now more an explanation of viewpoints, and why they seem to differ, ... while they probably doesn't ....

Quote from: The Traveller;625580The entire hobby in objective terms can be seperated into six elements.

• The GM
• The characters
• The players
• The rules
• The setting (also incorporating the genre and mood)
• The dice (most wouldn't include that but for reasons previously and yet to be specified I have)

I think this covers your list

A gamemaster is a referee for a tabletop roleplaying game where the players, as their characters interact with a setting with their actions adjudicated by using a set of rules and the referee's judgement using dice or abilities compared to a chance of success with play occurring in sessions which optionally can be combined to form a campaign with continuity from one session to the next.

The rest are details. I also tried to make it flexible enough to incorporate diceless RPGs like Amber and note that campaigns are optional as RPGs can be refereed as one-shots.

Quote from: estar;625815I think this covers your list

A gamemaster is a referee for a tabletop roleplaying game where the players, as their characters interact with a setting with their actions adjudicated by using a set of rules and the referee's judgement using dice or abilities compared to a chance of success with play occurring in sessions which optionally can be combined to form a campaign with continuity from one session to the next.

The rest are details. I also tried to make it flexible enough to incorporate diceless RPGs like Amber and note that campaigns are optional as RPGs can be refereed as one-shots.

doesn't really cover Amber as there is no concept of a chance of sucess in Amber.
Also All you have actualy done is add A gamemaster is a referee for a to your definition of a roleplaying game. So basically you are saying the GM is just the referee of a roleplaying game...

Quote from: jibbajibba;625817doesn't really cover Amber as there is no concept of a chance of sucess in Amber.
Also All you have actualy done is add A gamemaster is a referee for a to your definition of a roleplaying game. So basically you are saying the GM is just the referee of a roleplaying game...

I only know the bare basics of Amber, but how does it handle a situation where one hero is in hand to hand combat with 1,000,000 enemies all with a lower value?

Does he still win but it just takes a long time to  mop them all up?

I have not read the Amber rulebook for many. many years.

Quote from: Catelf;625808Of course you don't.
I'll try to explain it better:
The GM has power as a GM.
This power is at 100 % = Total Power.
However, normally it is not adviceable to use more than 50 - 60%, or the players will get pissed.
Therfor, you define 60% as "Total Power" .... since that is what normally can be used.

However, Horror-settings and similar, may really increase the amount of power that can be used, because it relies on the unknown, and even discomfort, so the players will not get as pissed off if one of them temporarily turns into an NPC due to possession, insanity, or even just panic.
In that case, the "Power adviceable to use" may reach 80, 90, or even a 100%.

Okay I understand a little better now.

The GM never uses their power against the group, in that regard it's not even power at all really. If the GM makes bad things happen to the group or kills the group entirely, that is (or should be) all part of bringing the awesome, as explained above.

If a GM sees gaming as an adversarial situation however things are likely to go south sooner rather than later.

Quote from: Catelf;625808"Nearest approximation".
The only thing that currently can describe a GM's role, if we don't use approximations, is "To be a GM".
The idea is to list the closest approximations, in order to explain the role of a GM, to mesh them together, or there will just be:
A GM's role is to be the GM.
And i am certain you want a better explanation than that.

As for the "Dispute things":
I dispute that the GM is unquestionably a part of the group.
Thing is, In one way, The GM IS a part of the Gaming Group.
But during the game, in the game, the GM is also clearly NOT a part of the group, since the roles of the GM is so diverse from the players.
However.
You have already made that distinction by placing the GM as a seperate Element ... so of course you don't have to point it out a second time, thereby the GM is a part of the gaming group ... but the GM is also a seperate Element from the players ...
Hmm...
As you see, i reasoned myself forward to that you were right, because i understood how you probably is thinking about it.

In a way, this whole post is now more an explanation of viewpoints, and why they seem to differ, ... while they probably doesn't ....

So er, we're in agreement?

Quote from: estar;625815I think this covers your list

A gamemaster is a referee for a tabletop roleplaying game where the players, as their characters interact with a setting with their actions adjudicated by using a set of rules and the referee's judgement using dice or abilities compared to a chance of success with play occurring in sessions which optionally can be combined to form a campaign with continuity from one session to the next.

Well no. A referee acts as a neutral party working between two or more teams to ensure fair play. Who are the two teams here? There's only the group and the GM. Is the game world, the setting, the other team? But the GM controls that, so the referee controls one entire team?

The more we examine the analogy the more deformed it becomes, so I don't think referee is an adequate description of the role.

Quote from: beermonk;625744Are you retarded?

That hasn't been entirely ruled out.

Quote from: smiorgan;625745I think he was objecting to your facile "the GM makes FUN!" statement. Which I completely agree with, it's just not very helpful when trying to pin down what the GM actually focuses on in a game to deliver the experience.

*DING!* Winnah!