Dysfunctions & Dragons

[Rexfelis]

I just terminated, mid-stream, an AD&D campaign that I've been DMing since last fall. It just wasn't as fun as it should have been, and I wasn't sure how to fix it.

After some thought, it occurred to me that some of our group's problems are explainable in terms of the Edwardsian Unified RPG Theory. I suspect that several of the players had different creative agendas, and some of us even had more than one agenda, or were using the wrong techniques for the agenda we wanted. As DM, I don't think I ever presented a clear picture about what type of game we were playing. It was meant to be an "old school" dungeon-crawl, using the classic AD&D module Temple of Elemental Evil. However, from the start I indulged in stealth narrativism, and waffled between gamism and simulationism in terms of our bread-and-butter dungeon play. As time went on, I increasingly tried to slide things toward the narrativist end of play, but it wasn't really working.

So much for me. As for the players: Player #1 has always had a narrativist agenda in all of our games, but typically tries to use sim methods to get that narrativist result (principally via an "actor stance," if I understand that bit of terminology). Player #1 occasionally becomes quite interested in a bit of character-centered "story," or in interpersonal interaction, but is usually bored or frustrated in combats.

Player #2 is an irregular attender, with an overt interest in narrativist rpg's, but who wanted to play in this nominally non-nar game anyway (at least on occasion). However, when Player #2 does play, it is either in the form of: detachment/boredom; acting out wildly, out of boredom; or, very occasionally, actor-stance sim-agenda play.

Player #3 vocalizes a narrativist agenda for his rpg play, but his actual play is characterized by a strong gamist agenda, coupled with occasional simulationist rifs.

Player #4 appears to have a primarily gamist agenda, and is frustrated with the lack of "progress" the PCs made in the adventure module. Character-centered side-treks in particular upset him a great deal.

Player #5 is pretty quiet except for occasional bursts of gamist-oriented play. He appears oddly satisfied with the poor gamist dish which I served up as DM. (Maybe, like me, he's simply used to such mediocrity!)

Given all these conflicting agendas (some of them even intra-personal), I suppose it's no suprise we didn't have much fun, especially given my confused/conflicted DMing. Oh, we had a fun moment every now in then, but in general it was a disappointment. Every weekend, I tried to climb mount improbable to fix the problems we were having, but it never felt quite right.

Then, one of the players decided to start GMing a Champions game (before I had decided to end the AD&D game). Chargen was interesting, with some of us giving a narr or sim slant to our characters, and with others ignoring backstory or premise altogether, but with EVERYONE engaging in gamist style min-maxing. There was no explicit creative agenda for the game, but I assumed it would be mainly gamist, wih occasional dashes of sim and narr. Well, in the event, the GM terminated the campaign MID-GAME because he wasn't having fun. (It didn't help that this was right before the climactic battle, and that some of us were actually anjoying ourselves. However, given his feelings, it was probably the right thing to do.)

Then, I struck another blow on our gaming group by officially ending the AD&D campaign.

Right now, what I'm wondering is, do we try to keep on gaming as a group? We're all friends and enjoy one another's company. However, clearly something has to change. Either we shouldn't try to game, or we should risk alienating some of the players by picking an rpg that most (but not all) will want to play, and by being very explicit about the creative agenda beforehand. However, I feel awkward bringing our group's hidden demons out into the open.  

Rexfelis

[Rexfelis]

There was one thought I forgot to mention: could this group be jump-started by a foray into rules-light gamism? We have played board and card games before, with some success. Part of what MAY have hampered the AD&D campaign (I don't have enough distance from it to look at it clearly) was that out-of-place sim and narr features were bogging down what I may have unconsciously intended to be a gamist-style dungeon bash. This thought occurred to me on reading Ron Edwards' Tunnels & Trolls threads.

I wonder if a T&T-style game could give this group the psychosocial enema that it needs. If we don't start having mega-fun soon, methinks our gaming night will soon be a thing of the past.

Rexfelis

[james_west]

Hullo !

Ironically, since I just spend a thread contradicting Mike on this, I think that what this group desperately needs is a couple of one-shot games with pervy rules.

I cannot recommend strongly enough getting them all to play Elfs, or My Life with Master, or Kill Puppies for Satan, or some such. The idea here is to play a game with such an overwhelmingly strong built in agenda that you can't miss it; it tells you a heck of a lot about players, how they act in these.

I think this also solves two other problems; it gets folks out of mental ruts, and since the games are inherently fun even if they're not what you'd want for a long game, they make everyone remember why they bother.

- James

[Rexfelis]

I cannot recommend strongly enough getting them all to play Elfs, or My Life with Master, or Kill Puppies for Satan, or some such. The idea here is to play a game with such an overwhelmingly strong built in agenda that you can't miss it; it tells you a heck of a lot about players, how they act in these.

I think this also solves two other problems; it gets folks out of mental ruts, and since the games are inherently fun even if they're not what you'd want for a long game, they make everyone remember why they bother.

I think you're right. The agenda of these games would be obvious to all of us, they are more accessible (in terms of learning curve) than the games we've been trying, and (apparently, from the reviews I've read) they are a lot of fun.  

It should probably be Elfs or My Life with Master. Kill Puppies for Satan is too out there for our group (at least for starters); the other two are "pushing it" but in a healthier, boundaries-bending way. It's a little depressing having to buy yet another rpg, though. But, I'm thinking Elfs especially might help open things up for us.

Thanks for the advice,

Rexfelis

[Scourge108]

I'd recommend taking a look at Donjon, too.  I never have actually had a chance to play, but it looks like a good game to at the very least determine what it is the players want out of the game.  It seems to center around a gamist dungeon-crawl mode, but could easily branch out into other creative agendas if the players want it to.