Trailblazing or not?

[ffilz]

Prompted by the GMless D20 thread, I've been doing a lot of thinking.

M.J.'s suggestion of Trailblazing for my GMing style seems to have some validity, but I'm not sure. I offer the following in an attempt to find my way:

I'm still trying to figure out how to proceed, my players in recap:

Aristocrat: probably a Narativist. I don't think I'm ever going to satisfy him and he's pretty much dropped away.

Unknown Soldier: I have only one session to go by, but this player seems likely to fit into my style, but his scheduling has not been able to find a match.

New Player: I have no actual play to base anything on, but an evenings chat over sandwiches suggest a possible match.

Half demon: This is the only player so far who has expressed an interest in exploring the setting (Sim). He has balked at participationist play in the past.

Husband: I'm increasingly thinking this player isn't a good match. I can't commit to making sure he has fun. He has resisted all attempts to interest him in what interests me in gaming.

Wife: I honestly don't think the wife is role-playing at all. I think she enjoys the company, and likes to enable her husband's hobby. When faced with decisions, we have to boil them down to choose A or B, and even then, often she will just freeze up (one of the best examples of freezing up was a situation where her character was the only one able to translate, initially we tried to have her repeat what I said in her own words, but even when we offered her the choice of just saying "I translate what everyone is saying," she just froze up - though admitedly, I'm not sure if we really explained the alternative to her).

Just looking at how I see the players, and thinking about fun gaming in the past, and what I have disliked in the past, I'm pretty sure I want something where the players are involved creatively. Not all of the gaming I have done in the past has been with detailed settings. When I have used detailed settings, play has gone well when the players either were familiar with the setting themselves, or were willing to read and/or ask questions to explore it.

I've been giving some serious thought to just why I like to use modules. I think a lot of it is that I really want a fairly open ended game, but I realize sometimes (often?) I have to provide the impetus that drives the game forward. But what I don't like is spending hours preparing stuff that doesn't get used. So a module which I can use completely off the shelf is one way to minimize my investment. If I just spend a couple hours reading the module, and the players walk away from it, no big loss. How I actually prefer to use modules however, is not to try and use it off the shelf, but to use it as a framework, and then have a light prep way to fill in encounters. Again, since there has been little prep, I'm not all that upset if the players refuse the module.

I feel like I'm having a horrible time articulating what I want from gaming, or maybe it's just that I really don't know what I want anymore. As a result, it seems like I wind up with games I really don't like, and quickly lose enthusiasm.

Frank

[Andrew Norris]

Hi Frank,

I don't want to take away from this topic -- I think there's definately room for discussion. But I do have a thought.

In the threads I've seen you post, my impression is that you're trying to fire up players that are rather lackluster. I have this feeling that no matter what you propose, especially absent their input, you're not going to find the one magical thing that gets them fired up.

"But I can't get them to tell me what they want," you might say. Or "They don't know." Well, here's a metaphor. If I was dating someone, I wasn't sure how they really felt about me, and I couldn't get them to articulate why they liked spending time with me, I probably wouldn't continue the relationship.

You're doing all the heavy lifting, but it's not going to fix things. I see you saying that; you want players who'll creatively engage with and add on to the world.

I really think your best bet would be to cut out the people who don't participate (especially the husband; come on, his poor wife has suffered enough), sit down with the new player and the player of the half-demon, and see if you can together come up with something that you'd all be fired up for. Not just satisfied, but fired-up for.

Given how you describe what you're looking for, I think something like the advice in Sorcerer&Sword would be worth looking at. A sketchily detailed fantasy world with information filled in by both the GM and players, during character creation and during play. I'm not going to try to sell you on Sorcerer as a game you should play with your group, because it does different things than what you're looking for, but the GMing advice seems spot on here.

Once you all jointly have some cool idea you're fired up for, I think recruiting will be a lot easier at that point.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

I'm not seeing any discussion topic here at all.

In fact, all I'm seeing, Frank, is that you dislike role-playing and always have. Or to put the best face on it, you've turned to it to provide something for you, and for some reason, it simply hasn't provided it.

So I'm going to put it to you very damned straight: the Forge cannot help you enjoy this hobby, if you have no idea what's there to enjoy for you. You can post 900 posts, and not accomplish a thing.

I suggest you do a search on all Actual Play threads begun by Gary (username: "hyphz"). I think you'll recognize his stuff, because it's just like yours - oh, woe is me, I don't enjoy this, but let's talk about it endlessly, and let's pay me attention because I'm not enjoying it.

Well, I call full-stop on this, just like I called it on Gary. You are using this forum as a substitute for playing, as a way to be involved with role-playing without actually doing it. And furthermore, you can't even come up with any understandable phrasing, despite repeated requests, for what you enjoy about it (or would) in the first place.

It's time to stop talking about the other people in your group (or "group," considering that you guys hardly play). You are the one who is not enjoying role-playing and, as you have said yourself, never have.

It's time to recognize that the Forge is not a social center where you can come to air your discontent and receive support for it. This is a workshop, a place of work, not a recovery center or a school nurse's office.

Imagine a literal smithy, where smiths work at the forges and strive to produce things. They often talk about the things and their experiences in producing them, and all of their work is improved thereby.

Now in comes a fellow who says, "Oh, I hate smithing! And it never works, and ow, my fingers always get burned. You know what, I really hate fire, and I don't ever want anything to do with it."

What should the smiths do? Stop their work and talk to the guy? Talk about how he'd really like fire if he'd really try? Or tell him that the fire won't burn his fingers if he uses the wonderful secret they know? Or what?

Nope. They should kick his ass outta there. Well, the Forge is a nicer place than that, and anyone can participate. But I'll put it this way: these woe-is-me threads from you have got to stop. They're not Actual Play threads; they're plain old attention-seeking substitutes for play, just as (I suspect) play is your substitute for actually socializing.

Since no one is banned at the Forge, here's the point for everyone - when Frank posts, be very damn sure that it's not just a repetition of the same old song. Go back and read every Actual Play post Frank has begun, and see whether this time, it's actually about something. If so, then banzai, we'll all join in with great joy. If not, then use your own discretion - but be aware that you may simply be reinforcing behavior that will only lead to its being repeated.

Best,
Ron

Clarification to avoid stupid hassles: "smithing" above refers both to play and to game design, separately and collectively.

[ffilz]

Andrew - that's the conclusion I'm coming to.

One thought I have is that my gaming really developed in situations where it was easy to shop for games. After about a year of playing with the small circle of friends who were introduced to the game at the same time, I started going to MIT's game club (so far, the best game club I've seen so far). Each Saturday, there were 5-10 different games going on. In college, we had a smaller club, but still, there were several games going on. These days, I'm just firing off recruitment posts to e-mail lists and hoping people will respond.

Ok, just ordered Sword and Sorcerer.

Frank

[Andrew Norris]

I just wanted to say that I think Ron and I are saying the same thing in part, namely "Find what it is you want to create, and then we can help."

Whether or not S&S is specifically helpful to you, I think you'll see a process that rejects complaining about how things are, and looks at where you want to get in a constructive fashion. I think it might be like the boot to the head that Ron's given you in this thread, in a more digestible fashion.

Good luck.

(Okay, Ron's right, this isn't an Actual Play thread, so I'll step away.)