[D&D 3.5e] Changing GM styles met with resistance

[Mark Causey]

My group is a fairly gamist group. I recently began a second setting with them because I was tired of what I will call 'bad decision baggage'.

Briefly, to describe, I'd made quite a few rules, setting, character and plot decisions that seemed like the best idea at the time that ended up making intra-character and inter-world balance issues that basically came down to making appropriately powered challenges an act of more and more increased suspension of disbelief (e.g. to make a challenge appropriate to the 'overpowered' characters, they had to face ridiculously high powered creatures or groups of overwhelming numbers -- while the players still thought of themselves as being only as their character level indicated).

Instead of making systemic changes, rule rollbacks, or 'fleecing' the characters of their items, I lucked out and found that people were willing to try the new setting (we went from Forgotten Realms to Eberron, for those who know; high-powered to low-powered).

However, all of this may simply be exposition. I have already ran three game nights, and just had the fourth. In the past few games, I'd been ramping up my use of distinct 'voices' for my NPCs (the actual tone, pace, timber, etc.). I have had comments in the past of being confusing because all of my NPCs have sounded the same and I didn't state who I was talking as.

So, in the most recent game, I had many different NPCs ... the first mate of a ship they arrived on, the guide through the swamp, the reptilian care-taker of the local tribe of kobolds. The kobolds didn't speak the same language so I even spoke to them in syllables at times.

The first mate of the ship had a standard gruff voice I use often, so there was little different reaction than normal. When they made fun of the kobold guide (who tried to teach them kobold, but dropped into common often), I gave it over to good roleplaying on the character's parts, because the kobolds are not a major race in the world and not highly respected. But when the game got sidetracked three times in a row with the reptilian caretaker (I used a lot of 's' es), and I confirmed it was beyond just the slight silliness of it all. I did this by stating once that I was just trying to add some color or flavor to the game; they continued to make fun of the NPC, so I started using third person to quote the character. Everyone stopped making jokes (was it because they thought I was upset?) and the game continued on.

At the end of the night, we always have everyone vote anonymously as to whom they think was the Most Valuable Character and the Best Roleplayer. One player voted me as the best roleplayer, to their 'detriment' -- these votes accrue toward extra XP. He tends to be the most honest player I have, though.

Any thoughts, questions? I'm basically posting to confess a frustration but mainly to note and evaluate why my new techniques met with some failure.

AtR

[Valamir]

Hey Aman, can you clarify what exactly the issue is?

Are you upset that your players made fun of your voice effects?

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

Ralph's (Valamir's) question is a good one, but I'm going to make some assumptions and reply on that basis. Aman, let me know if I'm starting off in the wrong place entirely.

I perceive that using characteristic voice effects, especially if they are exotic rather than tone/timing based, is often employed by GMs in order to make players feel as if they are "there" and to imagine things more clearly.

However, I also suggest that the technique is very often not appropriate for this goal. Simply put: the human imagination is already very powerful and needs little help. It can use many cues to construct what it constructs in the human's head, and representational cues are often not as good as evocative or iconic cues.

To be clear: we are all imagining as we sit at the table together, and we are all cueing one another with suggestions and feedback about what's being imagined (individually).

Representational cue: using lots of S's when presenting a serpent-man's dialogue

Evocative cue: moving slightly sinuously or "acting" the serpent-man

Iconic cue: showing a serpent-man picture when the NPC appears, or even better, a set of pictures and saying "somewhere between all these"

I have three points to make about these.

1. The first type of cue is often not sufficient, and in isolation, rarely effective at all.

2. The first type, however, may be utilized well sparingly. This is important: the "sparingly" part might be merely a single stressed S during the entire scene when the snake-man speaks, and not even early in the conversation. (same goes for the second type, actually)

3. The first type also does well (when utilized sparingly) to reinforce either of the other two types. In fact, under these circumstances of providing evocative and iconic cues, you will find that you are not providing representational cues at all - the other people at the table will start doing so spontaneously!

And finally - this is a very important thing! - all of the above ignores the single most powerful vocal technique a person can employ during role-playing. This is to utilize the pacing, tone, phrasing, and volume of one's speaking as a modern human would to get across whatever the point the imaginary character is making, regardless of setting, imaginary language, or race/species of the character.

Nothing beats this technique. All of the types of cues listed above are subordinate to it. When applied without it, all of them become less effective (and again, #1 is similarly subordinated in power to #2-3 as well).

Addenda points

1. Music is often suggested as an evocative cue. I consider it possible and often fruitful, but also problematic for a lot of reasons. Simply put, role-playing and listening to music are two different activities.

2. Pictures do very well as collages and combinations, less so as single "this is it" represenations. Again, you are provoking imagination, not making imagination unnecessary by replacing it.

3. Study speech, especially as applied in theater. Contrary to popular belief, professional theatrical speech is not bombastic and florid, like a bad Renaissance Faire guy. It is "full" (due to breathing technique), often slower than normal speech, and above all musically timed.

Again, Aman, let me know if I'm off-base from the start.

Best,
Ron

[Mark Causey]

Hey Aman, can you clarify what exactly the issue
is?

The issue is grossly understated, I do tend to ramble ...

Why did my group balk at the new techniques? Do Gamist players tend to want to focus more on the challenges? Does anyone have experience introducting a new style of play within a group and note a mistake I may have made by not bringing this into the contract, or not explicitly mentioning it in the premise?

AtR

[Keith Senkowski]

Hi,

Well my experience with trying to change styles with my players is that you need to explicitly let them know what you are trying to do.  Be honest with them about what you are trying to do.  It takes time, particularly with players that have not played different style games and those that actively dislike other styles even though they have no practical experience.

Personally I like to create rewards for players/characters to help facilitate the style of play.  Over time it becomes old hat to them.

Keith

[Valamir]

Hey Aman, can you clarify what exactly the issue
is?

Why did my group balk at the new techniques?
AtR

What do you mean by balk?  I don't see any balking going on.

What exactly did the players do that you are commenting on?

Who was "upset"?

Are the players upset with the new technique?  Did they indicate that they didn't find it fun?  Was their enjoyment negatively impacted by your voices?

Are you upset that the players didn't get into the spirit of the new technique as much as you hoped; that they thought it more amusing than inspiring?

Is the issue that the players didn't have fun, or is the issue that your acting abilities weren't appreciated?

I am unable to identify "what happened that makes you think something went wrong" in your post.

[Kerstin Schmidt]

Sounds slightly as if you felt that instead of getting into the mood and the roleplaying as you'd hoped when you increased your effort in playing NPCs, players staid OOC and made jokes, perhaps were feeling uncomfortable and/or made you uncomfortable?  Is that what you mean?

Were you aiming to get in-character roleplaying out of them? What response were you hoping for that you didn't get?  :)

I run Midnight for a DnD group with a Gamist slant but also (more recently, for some) increasing investment in roleplaying, and I've been shifting my game style a fair bit to find the best style for us all.  If you can tell us more specifically what you were trying to do and maybe include some quotes from players that bothered you if you can remember, then maybe we could offer more useful advice?  

Also, have you talked to your players about how they liked the session? IME talking to players and getting feedback can help finding solutions that outsiders on some bulletin board would never be able to come up with.

[Mark Causey]

2. This is important: the "sparingly" part might be merely a single stressed S during the entire scene when the snake-man speaks, and not even early in the conversation. (same goes for the second type, actually)

Ron, you have a good point, here. I did give a set of pictures of the 'yuan-ti' and guided discussion about what they all looked like, what this one looked like, etc. However, my speech was too full of the S's, and came to be the focus of their interaction with him, and not the 'final touch' I'd intended in my attempt to create a memorable character.

. . . utilize the pacing, tone, phrasing, and volume of one's speaking as a modern human would to get across whatever the point the imaginary character is making, regardless of setting, imaginary language, or race/species of the character.

This is, I think, an underlying concept I've never thought about or maybe ignored. Maybe I've gotten trapped with making the new races seem different and not thought about how to let the players fill in this gap on their own? The players do give me plenty of room to direct the shared imagination space (and responsibility -- they've often made statements to the fact that they're looking for less control over the 'plot' and that they'd rather I deal with that). However, maybe in this light, I should describe his speech as being with extra s's ... the guys are perfectly comfortable with telling me what I should say when I'm an NPC, and it has happened in the past.

Are the players upset with the new technique? Did they indicate that they didn't find it fun? Was their enjoyment negatively impacted by your voices?

I think the issue I'm having is that this group tends to start talking about the game, or its characters, when they've lost their focus or are having problems suspending disbelief. Their actions indicate to me that either it was too distracting or that it interfered with the space they were trying to imagine.

Sounds slightly as if you felt that instead of getting into the mood and the roleplaying as you'd hoped when you increased your effort in playing NPCs, players staid OOC and made jokes, perhaps were feeling uncomfortable and/or made you uncomfortable? Is that what you mean?

Exactly.

Were you aiming to get in-character roleplaying out of them? What response were you hoping for that you didn't get? :)

Yes, the players have a hard time not using third person to quote themselves, and have made overtures that they'd like to speak 'in character'.

Also, have you talked to your players about how they liked the session? IME talking to players and getting feedback can help finding solutions that outsiders on some bulletin board would never be able to come up with.

I've asked on many occasions, whether face to face, one on one, via email, etc. if they're having fun, what they'd like to see ... and I get generic answers. "I'm fine, it's fine, you're doing okay, I like what I'm seeing ..." over the course of the past 3 years or so. I find it difficult to extract actual feedback from them.

AtR

[ADGBoss]

I've asked on many occasions, whether face to face, one on one, via email, etc. if they're having fun, what they'd like to see ... and I get generic answers. "I'm fine, it's fine, you're doing okay, I like what I'm seeing ..." over the course of the past 3 years or so. I find it difficult to extract actual feedback from them.

AtR

Ok here I think I am going to go out on a limb a little Aman.  I think it is very interesting, the last part of your quote there. I am taking that mean that you have been the GM for the last three years?

One of the issues I think that has not necessarily been addressed and should be is GM fatigue.  You have been running the game for three years already.  I know many GM's go on for years running their favorite game etc... but there are some groups where this is not a healthy thing. So if I can ask...

1) When you decided to change settings, was there any thought of having someone else run the game?

2) Related to #1, do you all have other games (RPG) where you are not the GM or do you participate with another group as a player?

3) If you were to stop GMing for the group would the group fold or would someone else step up to the plate?

It could very well be that some of the issue is your own fatigue as a DM / GM as well as their inertia.  From reading your post, they group was probably just letting off a little steam or having a go at the character.  It is possible that their ridicule of the accent change was a weird kind of approval.  OF course not being there it is hard to say.

Also, with Eberron you are really not making a big leap and the change of setting would not, IMHO be enough to institute the kind of culture shock change you were looking for. Eberron for all it's good & bad is another Big Bad D&D world, just like Forgotten Realms.  That's not necessarily a bad thing but it's not all that disimilar from riding in two different kinds of Minivan.  Sure one may be a "new" design but hey, it's still a minivan.

just my 2 lunars...

Sean

[Mark Causey]

Ok here I think I am going to go out on a limb a little Aman.  I think it is very interesting, the last part of your quote there. I am taking that mean that you have been the GM for the last three years?

Yep.

1) When you decided to change settings, was there any thought of having someone else run the game?

As a matter of fact, I have dropped the Forgotten Realms campaign, but only because a player came out of the woodwork to run it.

2) Related to #1, do you all have other games (RPG) where you are not the GM or do you participate with another group as a player?

If this other player does run the game, then yes. I don't usually have a chance to play very often, but I do try and let others run when they want to. I do play in gamedays in the area, but not often.

3) If you were to stop GMing for the group would the group fold or would someone else step up to the plate?

Almost assuredly.

It could very well be that some of the issue is your own fatigue as a DM / GM as well as their inertia.

I will consider this and respond later.

AtR

[Russell Impagliazzo]

When you say that your attempts to introduce distinctive voice as a role-playing technique
was a failure,  it begs the question of what you hoped it would accomplish.  

I can think of three reasons to use distinctive voices off the top of my head:

1.  It accentuates the non-human nature of the NPC

2.  It differentiates the NPC from other characters and makes it more memorable

3.  You wanted to set a good role-model, so that the players would start expanding
their set of in-game techniques beyond third person description.

From your story, it sounds like from the point of view of reason 1 and 2, your use of voice was a great success.  The players picked up on the voice as a memorable characteristic, and they clearly understood its significance.    This may have been accompanied by jokes and teasing, but for many people humorous banter is a large part of the game.  (I like a bit of humorous banter myself.)  

For encouraging others to immitate you, I've learned two things in comedy improv class.
One is that, when a new kind of skit is introduced, if the first group to perform it are wildly successful,  there is always a dirth of volunteers to go next.   Having too successful a role-model makes the new thing more intimidating for the rest, since they'll almost certainly look bad in comparison.  Eventually, people pluck up their courage and do it anyway, but it takes time.

The second thing I learned in comedy class is that most people think funny voices and accents are hilarious.  A good distinctive voice can disrupt the rest of the class, and will be commemorated forever.  (We cannot mention ``peanut butter'' in my current improv
class anymore...)   So think of the laughter as appreciation.

[DannyK]

Also, with Eberron you are really not making a big leap and the change of setting would not, IMHO be enough to institute the kind of culture shock change you were looking for. Eberron for all it's good & bad is another Big Bad D&D world, just like Forgotten Realms.  That's not necessarily a bad thing but it's not all that disimilar from riding in two different kinds of Minivan.  Sure one may be a "new" design but hey, it's still a minivan.

But Eberron is the Cadillac of minivans!

Sorry, just having a "Get Shorty" moment.  

Seriously, one session is not enough time for you to get comfortable with the technique and for the players to get used to it. Particularly if they're not that much into talking IC, it may just seem weird and amusing to them.  I know there's a tendency for anything new and mildly amusing in a session to build into a running gag.  And by becoming more immersive in your GM'ing style, the players may be feeling a little uncomfortable and expressing it with humor.  I think that's pretty normal, if you've been running a game for them for three years.

[Scripty]

Hello,

However, I also suggest that the technique is very often not appropriate for this goal. Simply put: the human imagination is already very powerful and needs little help. It can use many cues to construct what it constructs in the human's head, and representational cues are often not as good as evocative or iconic cues.

...

Best,
Ron

Not to sound like too big of a suck-up but this was really great stuff, Ron, especially the distinction between evocative and iconic cues. Once again, something I wish I'd known a couple of campaigns ago...

Sorry, not meaning to threadjack here, but this advice really is good. I was wanting to just highlight/revisit it a bit to keep it from being buried/lost in the forum.

Done now. Bye.

Scott

[dalek_of_god]

I've asked on many occasions, whether face to face, one on one, via email, etc. if they're having fun, what they'd like to see ... and I get generic answers. "I'm fine, it's fine, you're doing okay, I like what I'm seeing ..." over the course of the past 3 years or so. I find it difficult to extract actual feedback from them.

I'm the second person to pull out this quote, but in this case I know the problem you're having. You asked if they're having fun. The problem being that you haven't asked a specific question. Giving a negative answer would feel wrong. After all, the game is fine and your players are having fun - but maybe they could be having more fun. General requests for constructive criticism usually end up getting no response whatsoever. You need to ask specific questions about particular parts of the game. More along the lines of "Did you find my snake-man voice distracting?" It's kind of like posting to the Forge. The more specific you can make your questions, the more useful the answers will be.

[Kerstin Schmidt]

Sounds slightly as if you felt that instead of getting into the mood and the roleplaying as you'd hoped when you increased your effort in playing NPCs, players staid OOC and made jokes, perhaps were feeling uncomfortable and/or made you uncomfortable? Is that what you mean?

Exactly.

You might have been overdoing the 'voices', as some posters have suggested.  
Or it could just have been an off night.  
Or of course it could have been your own discomfort at stepping on up :) to a new GMing challenge, which communicated itself to your players.

Did any of your players get into your new style of play that night?  Having someone to play off of can be a lifesaver when a group balks. You probably can't expect them all to be with you right away.  People will be people, people resist change.  (Even changes they want, weirdly enough.  And even more weirdly, GMs will be people, too.  I know that I can be pretty smart at resisting my own style changes.)  


Maybe play it by ear for a few sessions? See what degree of NPC-ness makes you feel comfortable and is fun, experiment. If the players start bantering again, you might drop what you were planning for a moment and respond in kind, if the NPC is right.  Invent snaky friendly insults - or not-so-friendly ones? Who's to tell whether "You must have hatched from a silver egg" is a compliment or a deadly insult?  Have fun with whatever the players throw at you and turn it into a part of the game.  As long as no one starts typing text messages into their phone or stacking dice, you're probably on the right track.  

Yes, the players have a hard time not using third person to quote themselves, and have made overtures that they'd like to speak 'in character'.

Oh cool.  So you're making a change they want to happen.  Won't keep them from being resistant because habits are hard to break... I'd say give yourselves and them a few sessions to settle in.  If you can bring even one player in on it, the fun you create will draw others in.  

I've asked on many occasions, whether face to face, one on one, via email, etc. if they're having fun, what they'd like to see ... and I get generic answers. "I'm fine, it's fine, you're doing okay, I like what I'm seeing ..." over the course of the past 3 years or so. I find it difficult to extract actual feedback from them.

AtR

More specific questions might yield more specific answers, as others have pointed out.  In specific questions, one old journalists' trick is to avoid yes/no questions and ask open-ended questions instead.  Such as:

"Did you find my lizardman voice too distracting?" can be answered with a grunt or a y/n wiggle of the head, no thinking required - they'll just say what they think wht you want or expect to hear.

"Which of the NPCs I played last session do you remember most?" is more likely to kick the player's brain into gear.  "Oh cool. Why?" is a good follow-up even if the player makes a derogatory remark about the NPC.  

Again, players are people, and changing your style of asking for feedback is likely to meet resistance at first, at least from some.  

Also some judging by some things you've posted, at least some of your players may just be too lazy and think far too little about the game at all to give helpful feedback - in which case in my experience they can be safely ignored because however well or poorly you do, they'll have their own limited little fun with your game.