In the vein of fostering discussion I would like to ask that folks try and decribe what thier philosophy of gaming is, it helps us understand what makes 'FUN' for us and how to get the most out of our time
Understand that these statements are my opinions, not TRUTH, nor unchangeable positions but they do, at this moment, shape my FUN and what I hope to get out of the game time.
1 Getting together with friends is supposed to be fun.
2 We share a common interest in RPG’s so why not indulge in that while we are hanging out.
3 RPG’s are in essence a means of telling stories.
4 Unlike many stories RPG’s are collaborative/gestalt/team based stories
5 The GM is like unto the nervous system, the players are like unto the tissues, fluids, and bones of the body. Without a nervous system they are spare parts but without them the nervous system is not a whole being either.
6 Each player and the GM all have stories they want to tell as part of the greater whole of the story entire.
7 Remember no matter if the character is only around for one minute in game as far as they are concerned the story is about them, the PC’s, the king, the demon, etc. are the secondary characters. IE just like real life: it’s your life, you are the center of the story the rest of us are secondary, some more important than others no doubt. It’s a great acting tip and really useful for both PC’s and NPC’s.
8 To believe that the only person with a story to tell is the GM is a retrograde position like unto the Monty Haul dungeon crawling of my high school years. I have left that play-style far behind. I feel that it does not increase the richness or depth of the world as a living vibrant thing. I cannot force anyone to agree with any of these opinions but if I could this would be the one.
9 It is my obligation to help each and every person involved in the game to tell their story. This may mean sitting and not being disruptive when a player/GM is furthering his part of the story. Note: This does not mean I have to pay absolute attention to what is occurring much as there are parts of stories that are more significant to one member of the audience than another. At other times this means I will be involved from something as small as non-verbal communication or a one word sentence, up to a massive amount of dialog between myself and the person who’s part of the story we are at that moment developing.
10 It is the GM’s obligation to work the stories of the players into the world, if at all possible.
11 It is the responsibility of the GM to notify the player if that player’s class, race, concept, and/or component of background do not fit within the stories being told. NO is an important word however, “X doesn’t quite fit, perhaps Y would get closer to what you are looking for while still working in this context (SETTING)” is always the superior response.
12 Yes this means a GM has to be able to think laterally and on his feet. As do players or really any human being wh wishes to do more than just exist in the world.
13 It is important to understand that the axiom “a compromise is a resolution that no one is happy with, but all involved get something” is a guideline that I use quite heavily in the collaborative storytelling process.
14 Sun-Tzu stated no plan survives the first engagement with the enemy. And no highly linear story by the GM will survive being introduced to the players. They can, and will, derail it so be prepared for that. As an example the players don’t confront the evil priest who is planning some big bad ritual (hell they may not even find the clues to know about the priest).
15 DON’T be pissed that they didn’t fight the fight you had laid out, and let the game stumble or collapse. Remember characters do not always do what you want them to do. (I suggest you read the section of Stephen King’s book about the craft of writing/ storytelling, On Writing, concerning the fact he had planned to kill off the teacher in Salem’s Lot but the character, in his words “demanded” to survive).
16 DO make it worse by now having them deal with the summoned demon who has killed the royal family as well as the evil priest. Sometimes it will spur slacking players ( and I have been one before) into action, it also emphasises the living nature of the world things do not go on hold while the players decide which inn to go to.
17 A great quote from John Wick (who wrote L5R and 7th seas RPG’s), "Do not worry over much about the plan, focus on the contingencies."
18 After playing RPG’s for 30 years I would like to have these things I have laid out. In my opinion, it allows for the greatest chance to explore the stories of the individuals that create the larger whole. It also means that I will, on occasion, follow the rails that are set before me without deviation or set back and let the story the GM wants to tell play out for many sessions until I see the place where my character fits into that story, or the story runs into an area where it overlaps with my characters perceived sphere of interest. In which case my feeling of how the character should behave may derail a rigidly linear plot. I would hope that as mature people a compromise can be found. Even if that means talking to me before an event occurs in game so that it avoids completely shutting down a session or even worse for all involved an entire game. I have in the past adapted a character to a situation that has seemed to go against the way the character “feels” it should react in order to achieve a particular story point for both other players and GM’s. Sometimes it’s better to let the cat out of the bag to one player rather than have them gunk up the entire works in game. Sometimes it is awesome for the GM to have a Mole on the other side of the screen to ensure that a particular plot point occurs.
19)In the context of a written story (book, movie, show, play, etc) there are two great archetypes that can be interesting:
A) the Tabula-Rasa (Data, Pinocchio, Galataea, the first cylon in Caprica)
B) The "I'm a loner Dotty, a rebel" (Wolverine, Deadpool, Pee-Wee, Tom Bombadil)
In a game setting these characters can derail the game by demanding an inordinate amount of time be dedicated to them. As soon as a Data-type character asks "why?" Plot, character interactions, even basic dungeoneering can come to a screeching halt.
As soon as a Wolverine-type decides that hes gotta go do what he does best, alone; the chances of it taking up scads of time and creating the screeching halt factor rises exponentially. Note: everyone wants to be Wolverine, but remmeber no one wants to be Wolverine's friends cause you dont get to do much. Also in this instance what is good for the goose is good for the gander: these do not make good long term NPC's to introduce, a single instance sure but not for the long haul.
An interesting and informative post. One of the problems with a well thought out post like this is that its hard to really discuss. I agree with most of your points and therefore have little to really add here.
Truth is if you fleshed out a lot of these points into a couple of paragraphs you'd be well on your way to having a pretty good 'DM advice' article.
An interesting and informative post. One of the problems with a well thought out post like this is that its hard to really discuss. I agree with most of your points and therefore have little to really add here.
Truth is if you fleshed out a lot of these points into a couple of paragraphs you'd be well on your way to having a pretty good 'DM advice' article.
I thank you for the feedback maybe thats the way to go with it.
|
I play with friends. I play for fun. Facilitating the fun is every players responsibility. Each player must try to recognize when something is detracting from the fun. Disputes are best handled after the game, unless the dispute is important enough to spend game time on. Refer to previous statement in regards to disputes. Always, always speak up when you are not having fun, but be sure to bring it up at the right time.
Pretty stream of conciousness, not sure if I got everything.
I've found that some people are more interested in playing a game and some people telling a story.
Both can present problems to the overall experience. A 'game' character may deviate from the story because all it is and does will be primarily for the mechanics. A 'story' character may be written so that it simply will not fit in to any cooperative story. (The OP:s loner example)
"10 It is the GM’s obligation to work the stories of the players into the world, if at all possible."
Here I tend to disagree. I think it's more the players' obligation to work their stories in to the world. It's much more easier to change a character than a world. Let alone to change a world to fit 5 arbitrary characters.
The unusual situation in an RPG compared to books and movies stems from the fact that all the players' characters must be present and involved in every part of the story. If every player tells whatever story for their character, how can this hapen? How will they stick together?
My philosophy as a GM is to create the setting and let the players be responsible for creating their stories intertwining in it. It's easier done if they all go in the general direction I pointed but they're free to find their own way. At the end of every session I tend to ask: where will you be going from here? Then plan the details of the next session based on that. If a player writes her character so that it has no option but to go separate ways from the others, I see no other solution than to say goodbye to the character and amke a new one. (Well maybe run two parallel games but I don't feel like it)
Then again, if most the players are interested mostly in the 'game' part, I think a railroad string of encounters with a couple of branches is the most mutually satisfying option.
100% agree and btw great article.
Think that in modern media there is very little opportunity for us to be collaborative storytellers like you mentioned. RPG is that [almost] unique situation whereby in films, books, music, stage plays and [to varying degrees] digital gaming - the narratives and pathways are pre-ordained.
While games do follow a structure it is the intangibles that players and GM provide, the impomptu story events and characterisations that make RPG so unique.
If we all watch the same movie - our impressions and experiences might differ, but fundamnetally its the same movie. Likewise for the book or the play or the game [although there is more leeway here for limited deviance from the narrative/scenario]. RPG's offer a linear freedom, [like Lazzo mentioned] but one that we almost design as we play.
And its fun :)
I agree 100%
I don't like the whole one shot games, kick in the door style games, etc. I like creating a person and giving him emotion and character. The game is a story and the players roles in it and how they go about their lives because of it. Each character will have morals, personal goals, desires, likes and dislikes, etc.
I also try to incorporate the players in the game on a personal level for each one. I asked the players to write up background stories for their characters and I am using them to plan out specific quests throughout the campaign that perain to their character on a personal level. This helps bring the characters alive.
I view rpgs as an improv play basically, where the players pick who they want to act out and how. That's just how I view it and I get so much more out of tabletop that way. If I wanna just kill things, do real world math for a game and figure out which weapons average damage is more and better (which I think is dumb, you'll never roll a 4.75 on a 6 sided dice), ill go back to MMO's and other video games.
1 Getting together with friends is supposed to be fun.
2 We share a common interest in RPG’s so why not indulge in that while we are hanging out.
3 RPG’s are in essence a means of telling stories.
4 Unlike many stories RPG’s are collaborative/gestalt/team based stories
5 The GM is like unto the nervous system, the players are like unto the tissues, fluids, and bones of the body. Without a nervous system they are spare parts but without them the nervous system is not a whole being either.
6 Each player and the GM all have stories they want to tell as part of the greater whole of the story entire.
With you so far...
7 Remember no matter if the character is only around for one minute in game as far as they are concerned the story is about them, the PC’s, the king, the demon, etc. are the secondary characters. IE just like real life: it’s your life, you are the center of the story the rest of us are secondary, some more important than others no doubt. It’s a great acting tip and really useful for both PC’s and NPC’s.
Annnnnddd you lost me. The story MAY be about them. MAY being the operative word there. It's up to the players to take an active role.
8 To believe that the only person with a story to tell is the GM is a retrograde position like unto the Monty Haul dungeon crawling of my high school years. I have left that play-style far behind. I feel that it does not increase the richness or depth of the world as a living vibrant thing. I cannot force anyone to agree with any of these opinions but if I could this would be the one.
I tend to agree with this one.
9 It is my obligation to help each and every person involved in the game to tell their story. This may mean sitting and not being disruptive when a player/GM is furthering his part of the story. Note: This does not mean I have to pay absolute attention to what is occurring much as there are parts of stories that are more significant to one member of the audience than another. At other times this means I will be involved from something as small as non-verbal communication or a one word sentence, up to a massive amount of dialog between myself and the person who’s part of the story we are at that moment developing.
10 It is the GM’s obligation to work the stories of the players into the world, if at all possible.
No, and no. It is the responsibility of individuals to see to it that their stories get told. The GM and the other PCs shouldn't have to lift a finger to help you flesh out your stories.
11 It is the responsibility of the GM to notify the player if that player’s class, race, concept, and/or component of background do not fit within the stories being told. NO is an important word however, “X doesn’t quite fit, perhaps Y would get closer to what you are looking for while still working in this context (SETTING)” is always the superior response.
12 Yes this means a GM has to be able to think laterally and on his feet. As do players or really any human being wh wishes to do more than just exist in the world.
Agreed.
13 It is important to understand that the axiom “a compromise is a resolution that no one is happy with, but all involved get something” is a guideline that I use quite heavily in the collaborative storytelling process.
No. A compromise is a system by which no one wins, and everybody loses.
14 Sun-Tzu stated no plan survives the first engagement with the enemy. And no highly linear story by the GM will survive being introduced to the players. They can, and will, derail it so be prepared for that. As an example the players don’t confront the evil priest who is planning some big bad ritual (hell they may not even find the clues to know about the priest).
15 DON’T be pissed that they didn’t fight the fight you had laid out, and let the game stumble or collapse. Remember characters do not always do what you want them to do. (I suggest you read the section of Stephen King’s book about the craft of writing/ storytelling, On Writing, concerning the fact he had planned to kill off the teacher in Salem’s Lot but the character, in his words “demanded” to survive).
16 DO make it worse by now having them deal with the summoned demon who has killed the royal family as well as the evil priest. Sometimes it will spur slacking players ( and I have been one before) into action, it also emphasises the living nature of the world things do not go on hold while the players decide which inn to go to.
17 A great quote from John Wick (who wrote L5R and 7th seas RPG’s), "Do not worry over much about the plan, focus on the contingencies."
Agreed, once again.
18 After playing RPG’s for 30 years I would like to have these things I have laid out. In my opinion, it allows for the greatest chance to explore the stories of the individuals that create the larger whole. It also means that I will, on occasion, follow the rails that are set before me without deviation or set back and let the story the GM wants to tell play out for many sessions until I see the place where my character fits into that story, or the story runs into an area where it overlaps with my characters perceived sphere of interest. In which case my feeling of how the character should behave may derail a rigidly linear plot. I would hope that as mature people a compromise can be found. Even if that means talking to me before an event occurs in game so that it avoids completely shutting down a session or even worse for all involved an entire game. I have in the past adapted a character to a situation that has seemed to go against the way the character “feels” it should react in order to achieve a particular story point for both other players and GM’s. Sometimes it’s better to let the cat out of the bag to one player rather than have them gunk up the entire works in game. Sometimes it is awesome for the GM to have a Mole on the other side of the screen to ensure that a particular plot point occurs.
Agreed.
19)In the context of a written story (book, movie, show, play, etc) there are two great archetypes that can be interesting:
A) the Tabula-Rasa (Data, Pinocchio, Galataea, the first cylon in Caprica)B) The "I'm a loner Dotty, a rebel" (Wolverine, Deadpool, Pee-Wee, Tom Bombadil)
In a game setting these characters can derail the game by demanding an inordinate amount of time be dedicated to them. As soon as a Data-type character asks "why?" Plot, character interactions, even basic dungeoneering can come to a screeching halt.
As soon as a Wolverine-type decides that hes gotta go do what he does best, alone; the chances of it taking up scads of time and creating the screeching halt factor rises exponentially. Note: everyone wants to be Wolverine, but remmeber no one wants to be Wolverine's friends cause you dont get to do much. Also in this instance what is good for the goose is good for the gander: these do not make good long term NPC's to introduce, a single instance sure but not for the long haul.
In all my years as a DM and a PC, I have never experienced a problem with either of these play styles.
I think part of the disconnect here is that you view the game as a collaborative storytelling experience. I view the game as a set of individual stories which may or may not intertwine but are happening simultaneously.
To clarify point 7: it is more about approaching each character: NPC or PC as if they are a real person with thier own goals agendas and desires. For example, My life revolves around me, my wife is the most important secondary character in that story, my boss my co workers etc. are strong recutrring characters but my actions are focused on my goals even if that goal is helping my wife acheive one of hers. It really seems like I need to expand upon that point of encouraging players and DM's to make motivated characters, sorry if it was unclear. If you just plain dont agree thats cool too.
I am curious Juan how your sessions play out does your group tend to have "what are you (player1) doing" moments before you get to the enemy killing? With a measure of time for those individual stories. Do you have a measuure of notes, email, etc to provide an avenue for players to get thier stories told? Or as Lazzo astutely pointed out, do you see yourself and your groups fall more into the "game" end of the spectrum.
Thanks to all who are participating so far. I really enjoy seeing how others view the hobby.
In the vein of fostering discussion I would like to ask that folks try and decribe what thier philosophy of gaming is, it helps us understand what makes 'FUN' for us and how to get the most out of our time
Understand that these statements are my opinions, not TRUTH, nor unchangeable positions but they do, at this moment, shape my FUN and what I hope to get out of the game time.
1 Getting together with friends is supposed to be fun.
2 We share a common interest in RPG’s so why not indulge in that while we are hanging out.
3 RPG’s are in essence a means of telling stories.
4 Unlike many stories RPG’s are collaborative/gestalt/team based stories
5 The GM is like unto the nervous system, the players are like unto the tissues, fluids, and bones of the body. Without a nervous system they are spare parts but without them the nervous system is not a whole being either.
6 Each player and the GM all have stories they want to tell as part of the greater whole of the story entire.
7 Remember no matter if the character is only around for one minute in game as far as they are concerned the story is about them, the PC’s, the king, the demon, etc. are the secondary characters. IE just like real life: it’s your life, you are the center of the story the rest of us are secondary, some more important than others no doubt. It’s a great acting tip and really useful for both PC’s and NPC’s.
8 To believe that the only person with a story to tell is the GM is a retrograde position like unto the Monty Haul dungeon crawling of my high school years. I have left that play-style far behind. I feel that it does not increase the richness or depth of the world as a living vibrant thing. I cannot force anyone to agree with any of these opinions but if I could this would be the one.
9 It is my obligation to help each and every person involved in the game to tell their story. This may mean sitting and not being disruptive when a player/GM is furthering his part of the story. Note: This does not mean I have to pay...
+1
These are some great points. I especially agree with #1, #4, #6 and #19. That said we all need to play to our strengths and our desires so they may not apply to you, your group or your experiences.
Thanks!
Great list Dragonsong. Love to game with you some time, if that's the way you approach your games. I don't really disagree with any of it, but will add my two cents.
The game, for me, is all about having fun with my friends and getting the chance to "play hero" in ways the real world doesn't usually allow.
When I'm playing I want a GM who is going to have a vibrant living world that has enough internal logic and cohesion that I can really immerse myself in it and get into playing my character believably. I want the world to be dynamic, in that it interacts with my character, and I want my character or my group's actions to be able to change that world, even if in just small ways. However, there should be other things going on in the world (history) that will also impact us.
I want memorable NPCs, quests that motivate my character and villains so dastardly and dangerous that when we finally run them to ground and give them the thrashing they deserve the table erupts in cheers, victory dances and high fives.
I want a level of danger high enough so that character death is a very real and invigorating possibility, but not so great that characters are dying constantly and it becomes hard to get attached to your character.
I want my character to start lowly and humble and rise to greatness over time.
I want good and creative play and decisions to be rewarded and mistakes to have consequences.
Most of all, I want a DM who is in charge, but flexible, with sufficient mastery of both the rules and the story/world so that he can keep the game moving no matter what crazy/stupid/brilliant/unexpected stuff we throw at him.
As a GM, quite simply, I try to provide what I want as a player. I stumble at times when IGM and have some nights that are better than others, but I think I have my moments.
Stuff... I want good and creative play and decisions to be rewarded and mistakes to have consequences.
Most of all, I want a DM who is in charge, but flexible, with sufficient mastery of both the rules and the story/world so that he can keep the game moving no matter what crazy/stupid/brilliant/unexpected stuff we throw at him.
As a GM, quite simply, I try to provide what I want as a player. I stumble at times when IGM and have some nights that are better than others, but I think I have my moments.
Ohh believe me I aspire to these I do not always acheive it either. Yea I would love a chance to roll with many of you guys on the boards.
@ Mage Evolving I would agree whole heartedly that each to thier strengths (or the weaknesses they wish to work with/on) is really important.
I am curious Juan how your sessions play out does your group tend to have "what are you (player1) doing" moments before you get to the enemy killing? With a measure of time for those individual stories. Do you have a measuure of notes, email, etc to provide an avenue for players to get thier stories told? Or as Lazzo astutely pointed out, do you see yourself and your groups fall more into the "game" end of the spectrum.
We just rely on individual input to get the stories told. I don't set aside time per se, rather relying on people to jump in when they feel it is appropriate. I don't see my group cbeing close to the "game" end at all, really.
No. A compromise is a system by which no one wins, and everybody loses.
What a bizarre generalization. I mean, let's say Alex and Bob want to split a pizza, and the idiot delivery place doesn't allow half-and-half pizzas. Alex likes anchovies the best, but also enjoys sausage. Bob can't stand anchovies -- he prefers bacon (which Alex can't eat), but Bob has no problem with sausage, either. Both of them hate pineapple.
A compromise would be to order a sausage pizza. It's not ideal for either of them, but it works for both of them.
A system by which everyone loses would be for them to order pineapple. That would be incredibly stupid of them.
If you cannot perceive a major difference in the above examples, I don't know what else to say. I know it's de rigeur in today's politics of mutual antagonism to pretend that any compromise is "impossible" or is "for sissies," but that doesn't have to be the truth.
Disputes are best handled after the game, unless the dispute is important enough to spend game time on.
This, a dozen times this.
I'm a player in a Scales of War campaign and our friggen DM has the worst habit of stopping the action to look up a rule. Some of the other players can really aggravate this as well. DM makes a call - player X disputes it and then the DM goes into this 'I have to prove that I am right' mode and the next 40 minutes of very limited game time is lost while books are consulted.
What really infuriates me here is that this keeps coming up and the wrong call is made. I'm a pretty damn fine rules lawyer myself (but can't stand wasting game time on rules lawyering - we have a DM to tell us how its going to be after all) and I have repeatedly returned home after a game being pretty sure that after all the delays the call was actually wrong. In reality grabbing books and flipping through them at the games table is a crappy way of trying to get to the bottom of a complex rule interaction. Skimming forums, or asking on them, doing Google searches and checking out online resources is a better method of getting all the facts and once all of this is marshaled together a correct interpretation can be made in the complex rule sets we play with these days.
Thus I've been really annoyed by 40 minute delays in game play while rules are argued back and forth only to then investigate the rules after I returned home and set the record straight by email during the subsequent week. Better that the DM note that the rules are unclear here, make a friggen call and we can look this up later.
|
|
I'm a player in a Scales of War campaign and our friggen DM has the worst habit of stopping the action to look up a rule. Some of the other players can really aggravate this as well. DM makes a call - player X disputes it and then the DM goes into this 'I have to prove that I am right' mode and the next 40 minutes of very limited game time is lost while books are consulted.
I made this mistake for the last time when I stopped to discuss how 'fair' Sneak Attack is in 3rd edition with a new player who had only played 2nd. We went our separate ways when he told me he did not have the time or interest to learn the rules.
Now, any time someone says 'I don't think it works that way' I respond with 'we'll discuss it after the game'. This has the advantage of not stopping the game, and by the end, the player has forgotten the issue and I don't have to discuss it. :)
Good points from everyone here. I can't say I agree with everything, but I agree with most of it.
Just a few points to add. I am one of those players who loves to create a compelling and believable character. I agonize over their in-game actions trying my best to figure out what THEY would do, based on their backstory and personality. I love the narrative path and how the game weaves multiple stories into one mutual experience.
But, I do have to admit I love the tactical and number processing aspects of the game too. I love to peruse spell books and magic item lists and contemplate how to synergize odd and unexpected combinations into powerful in game effects. I work within the system to optimize the important aspects of the character so that they are not only a compelling story, but an effective team member. There's a real challenge in working out strategy and tactics, and I love that the game allows me to indulge both my inner actor and my inner field marshall. I love a good story and live for those compelling narrative moments that you will remember fondly 20 years later.
But I do so love kicking ass.
This has the advantage of not stopping the game, and by the end, the player has forgotten the issue and I don't have to discuss it. :)
Forgetting the rule dispute is definitely an issue. I actually got into the habit, after a session with a rules dispute, of immediately turning on my computer and opening my email so that I can review the game in my head and save the rules issue as a draft in the email.
I usually find even doing this right after the game involves me scratching my head trying to remember exactly what the issue was but I can usually dredge it up if I think through everything that happened in the session from the beginning - usually there is a 'aha' moment when I get to the part where the arguing started.
I've started recording my game sessions on my iPhone, so if I ever want to revisit those disputes, I can just listen to them again. :)
That and Jeremy's email idea are really good ideas, seems like more and more i want an ipad or the droid based tablet to do these things at the table with minimal time distraction.
@brassbasoon: I will make as mechanically effective character as i can with the stat generation method used. I do tend to avoid "dump stats" except in the cases of playing dumb in a party of new players so as to mechanically encourage myself to not provide too much advice. I see no conflict between kicking ass in whatever i am making the character to do and roleplaying.
Yeah, slowing down the game is bad and I try to break the habit. However, I started a new Pathfinder game however and the GM had misread opportunity attacks to include moving into ones threat range. So if we ever moved to attack someone they attacked us first. I kinda had to challenge that, (like 5 mins in) or bang my head on my desk for the next 6 hours.
Anyway Dragonsong, you sound like a really cool GM. I am happy with my current game but sadly in my town, (about 4,000 population) gaming groups are sporadic at best. I am torn atm because I really want to play in a Kingmaker game but the only way to get one started might be to GM it.