[Deadlands] Zombies and a Mine

[Rustin]

I'm a player in a 6-7 member group.  We plan to meet bi-weekly, but it usually ends up being monthly.   I'm the only player familiar with indie style games.  Prior to character creation I emailed the GM this request:

I would like to try something a bit different in how we approach this world than we've done in the past.  If these suggestions don't get you jazzed or excited, let me know.  These are just suggestions, they are not make or break demands on my part.

I would prefer incorporating my character's future interests tightly into the main focus of play.  If you have an idea for adventures based on some specific elements (Ghost rock, wicasas etc..) or NPC's in the Deadlands world then I'd like to be able to have a character who has an interest in those elements which are in conflict to some other NPC's interest in those same elements.

I've made back stories before -- they are fun, but I really want the story of my character to develop "in play," rather than just me writing it down all alone.   If that makes sense.  I want us, as a Group, to help me tell the story about my character.

So I plan on having a short history packed full of specific interests about specific in game elements.  Then in play I get to discover just how important those interests are to that character when we explore what kind of risks and sacrifices he needs to make to achieve his goals.

The main difference here is that these NPC's can't really be a total "mystery" to me prior to the game starting.  You'll have to tip your GM hand just a bit so I can focus my PC's interests in conflict with those NPC's.

The GM's Response:

As of right now I'm completely open to ideas in which you'd like to incorporate into your character's history.  The fluff sections of the player's guide should probably give you an idea of just what the setting has in store for the posse.  Right now I am only going to enforce one small theme on each of the players.  Your history can be about anything you like but you must somehow end up at a Denver Pacific train station in Dodge City, Kansas.  This will give me an easy way to get the posse together.  So, the session will start with you beginning your journey into the west.  Outside of that the sky's the limit.

I was looking for a challenge, so I took Clinton's Cheap and Cheesy adventure creator for a whirl.  Came up with some elements, talked another player into incorporating these elements into a challenging situation: Basically my character's sister (the other player's character's fiancé) was cursed and rose from the grave as a siren-ghoul.  We've been trying to track her down.  My character discovered the ability of Ghost rock (part of deadlands world) in photographic plates, that I can see the image of her next victim if I take a picture of her last victim.  Last we saw a photo of a man in Dodge City.

Sadly I missed the first session, but a good journal of play was done and I found that an avalanche had stopped the train and the group ended up in a mine full of zombies.  Lots of zombie burning ensued.

The next session was basically more zombie burning.  I kept in character-- though I knew the GM wanted us to go explore the mine.  There was simply no reason, given my PC's history, to really risk life to explore this mine.   The group just sort of hunkered down knowing a rescue team would soon arrive.  We were then attacked by a blood ghost of some sort and the adventure ended.   At the end the GM said, "I really wanted you to go into the mine."

Next I hear the GM wants to switch to the older version of Deadlands because he has more supplements based on those rules. 

I talked to (instant messaged) the GM last night a bit about my concerns that the rate we are playing (8hrs a month) we'll never get anything done and not much of any story will happen.  I tried to introduce the idea of Story Now, but it just was tough.  The conversation fell flat.  I told him I'd send him an email, but I'm just not sure how to approach the topic.   Often talk of indie game technique gets translated by traditional players into a "harsh critique of GM style" and its sort of feels like walking on egg shells when I bring up the subject matter.

I know if I just go with the flow I'll still have more fun (hanging with friends, blasting zombies or whatever) than not gaming, but I just read about indie these techniques where I know we'll have exponentially more fun if we just changed our group's gaming habits a bit.

I guess the issue is: what do you do with such a disjoint of creative agenda?

Any suggestions?

[Simon C]

Whew, tough situation!

I think it's pretty tough to change someone's creative agenda. In the end, it's about what they find fun in a game, and you can't really change that.

That said, I think that if you've got the rest of your group on your side, (in the sense that they too are interested in exploring new ways of playing, not in the "they think you're cooler" sense), it's possible that you may be able to effect a change in the way the group plays.  For a start, I'd suggest that it's something that you talk about as an entire group.  From the way you tell it, it sounds like the whole group was jazzed about chasing down this lost sister, and then the GM gave you a zombie-hunt.  That's not even a problem with CA, that's just a classic bait-and-switch: Telling you you're there to play your character, and that you can do what you like, and then giving you a railroaded adventure.  I think it's worth talking to the whole group about how they want to play the game.

Also, from the sounds of it, the GM seems like he's finding it hard to come up with material.  Talking of modules is ominous, as is the idea of switching systems.  Maybe this is a good time to work out with him a way of making his job easier - letting the players do more of the work in creating scenes and encounters.  If he likes running modules, maybe he'd be happy running "modules" created by the players in the group? If the rest of the group is onboard for this, it could really make his job as GM easier, while letting the players deal with the issues that are central to their characters.

You're right that it's important thet he doesn't feel like you're critiqueing him.  Tell him that you really like the way he runs the material, and that you had a good time with the way he ran the game, but the material isn't really what you're interested in.  It's not him you have a problem with, it's the game.  Tell him that you really want him to retain control of how the game goes, but you want him to use material - scenes, NPCs, and so on, provided by the players.  You might run into a problem in that the other players aren't up for taking on some of the GMing duties.  It's important to work with what the group wants.  In the end, maybe you just can't get that type of play from this group.

[Glendower]

I've been in similar situations.  This is a really sticky social contract issue, and you have to talk about it far away from the gaming table.  I'd recommend you follow a few steps. 

First off, fire off some emails to each member of the gaming group saying something to the effect of "hey, this is pretty neat, you might want to give it a read!" and link a few of the articles regarding Big Model Theory and GNS. See if anyone replies with "hey neat!" or something similar.  Then go out for dinner with one or two of these people and talk about it.  Go to the Gym with them and talk about it some more. 

You may not get any replies, and that's their choice.  You can't force this stuff without people getting really annoyed really fast. 

Now, here's the next bit.  If you get a few people interested, start a bi-weekly game session and play a game that utilizes a lot of the Forge thinking.  I recommend Dogs in the Vineyard, it's a wonderful, functional game.  Play this game and try others, such as Capes, With Great Power..., Burning Wheel, and others.  These games are great fun!  And then talk about them.  Talk about them some more.

As for the Deadlands game itself, don't try to suggest changes.  The group has a very set of socialized rules, and those rules say that making those suggestions are bad. That's why it feels like you're walking on egg shells.  Your monthly game's social rules are set, and any attempts to change them will get resistance and resentment.  It won't work, and to be honest it's more trouble than it's worth.  Either participate and follow the unspoken social rules, or leave the game.

With a newly formed social group, even if it's the same people on a different night, or a different location, you can make new social rules.   That's where you implement the Story Now concepts. 

I hope this helps.

[Jasper Flick]

I guess the issue is: what do you do with such a disjoint of creative agenda?

Don't mix them. Don't play or change your mindset. Though that's harsh, it might be what it boils down to. I really don't know much about the situation, but here's what I think is going on: you're all riled up about contributing to play and doing meaningful things in-game, while you're presented with a traditional fixed GM scenario. You want freedom but you actually only get two choices: go here because the GM want you to, or screw up play. Add to that the fact that you also have to figure out what the GM actually wants you to do, and you won't enjoy yourself. I know I won't.

I'm actually not surprised it happened. Sure you provided the GM a set of hooks, but there wasn't really a two-way communication going on, right? There was no agreement whatsoever what play was going to be about. It is possible that the GM saw your pre-game contribution as a free way to get your buy-in for the game and get some color out of you during play, and nothing more than that.

So if you want to continue play with this group I agree you should talk about what you all actually want, face to face. See if that clears up things, I'm sure it does. (And I actually advice against throwing Forge theory in the mix, use your own words instead.)

[Rustin]

Thanks for the replies.

The common theme I'm seeing from each response: respect the set social agreement first and bring up indie techniques in a new context second.

Our group has been playing for over 15years and that social agreement is very ingrained.  So I think this advice is sound.   I just overstepped my bounds in this case.

Here's my plan.

My GM just emailed me, asking my take on the older Deadlands rules.
I'm going to point out how they don't get me too excited because they don't have any mechanism for scene framing or distinction between task/conflict resolution, nor do they have any integrated keys or kicker mechanics.

I'll qualify that review by saying the rules will work fine given our normal style of play and I can enjoy our normal style of play.

Then, in a week or so, I'll try to revive my "Pizza Bribe Indie Game Night."

[Glendower]

Then, in a week or so, I'll try to revive my "Pizza Bribe Indie Game Night."

Awesome!  I bribed one of my gaming groups to play Indie games, and it turned into a very happy afternoon of Dogs in the Vineyard, which I wrote up here.  I wish you all the best, I think you're totally on the right track!

[Callan S.]

Hi Rustin,

It's best to remember is that if the group comes for a game of baseball, you can't nudge play over to being soccer by slipping some soccer balls onto the field. Even if you take away their bats, they'll try scoring home runs by swinging the soccer balls.

The best way to get a soccer game going is to advertise a soccer game. But your GM is advertising a baseball game and it looks as though that's what he's interested in anyway.

Just think about the last time someone sent you a party invitation - by the time someones sending an invite, they already have a fixed idea in their head of the party they want to have. It might feel like having an invitation means you have some negotiation powers, like suggesting it be fancy dress. But as sure as the ink is dry on that invite, the party itself is set in concrete.

My GM just emailed me, asking my take on the older Deadlands rules.
I'm going to point out how they don't get me too excited because they don't have any mechanism for scene framing or distinction between task/conflict resolution, nor do they have any integrated keys or kicker mechanics.

I'll qualify that review by saying the rules will work fine given our normal style of play and I can enjoy our normal style of play.

I think Jasper's buy in and colour assesment is likely dead on - he's not interested in whether you don't like bits, he's asking 'Are you in on this (with me)?'.

I think he's offering you an invitation with this - you either accept or decline.

Then, in a week or so, I'll try to revive my "Pizza Bribe Indie Game Night."

What's the plan for that? I'll show my cards on my concern - I'm imagining everyone turning up for baseball and then you try and bribe them over. Though if your going to tell them like a wekk in advance its a free pizza and new game (not indie. New), I can see people turning up because they dig to some extent the nights activities. I can see them turning up for some new game, rather than the usual baseball.