Tell me about your most utter failure

[Frank T]

Inspired by this post, I would like to talk about real messed up attempts to introduce new elements into your gaming. I hope that readers might benefit by avoiding the same mistakes.

Here is my story: I have this group I've been playing with since school, some 10 years ago. We used to play Star Wars d6. I was GM, most of the time. It was classic gaming, GM-driven, pre-designed plot, some elements of challenge along the way... and it was functional. Then I started reading about player empowerment, kickers and the like. Not on the Forge, not then. Just a few unrelated posts on my German board. And I stumbled across The Window, which fascinated me.

So I got my group to try something new, and why wouldn't they? They had always trusted me as the person in charge to provide for a good game. So I tried and started to explain what I was up to. Only I didn't know what I was up to. I wanted kickers, and wanted to improvise them on the spot. But I hadn't really understood what kickers were, never having read Sorcerer.

I also wanted "player empowerment", whatever that was. I wanted the players to introduce new setting elements and NPCs. Only I didn't know how. I figured they should just, y'know, somehow jump at the opportunity and start to pull some cool stuff out of the hat.

And I used The Window, unprepared for the problems it might cause. We decided on a western setting. Then we made characters. The players took well to the Window character creation, but of course, they made individual characters without any sort of link to one another, just like they always had. Luckily, one of the players at least provided some sort of plot hook (something about Union Pacific and him being sent to investigate). So I said "go." And everybody looked at me like: "Now what? Where is the plot? What are we supposed to do?" And I was like: "I ain't got a clue!" It was awkward.

Clumsily, and with all the goodwill from the players I could possibly expect, we got the characters together in a bunch and riding off to some sort of destination. There was one player who saved my butt at that point, the one who had also provided the plot hook and now claimed some sort of leadership (in character). But I could sense that they all were just playing it along because I had asked them to. They were doing it for me, not enjoying it, maybe save for that one player. The others were asking themselves: "What is he up to?"

Then the characters got into a fight, and things got from bad to worse. Since The Window didn't provide any sort of notion, system wise, as to what to expect as the outcome of an action, the players were very hesitant to do anything. I believe this is a flaw of the game, too. Especially with the vague rules on taking damage. Anyway, we quit play at that point. I admit this was my most utter failure at running an RPG.

For sheer shame of this incident, I have never again asked of these players to try one of my cool new Indie Games. I could pull off a decent smooth game of Dogs in the Vineyard or Primetime Adventures for them, but as they are understandably hesitant about that, I will not insist. Rather, I GM the same way I always did, with only mild fun for me and an effort in preparation that is really beginning to annoy me. So I freeze the gaming down to like each two months. It's a damn shame.

Tell me about your most utter failure in running or playing an RPG!

[Georgios Panagiotidis]

*reads*
*nods in agreement*
*stands up*

My name is Joe, and I'm a clueless GM.

I've experienced pretty much exactly what you described with my PtA games. Although after plugging through some more or less painful sessions, I feel like I'm slowly (that is to say sloooooooooooooooooooooooooooowly) figuring things out and things are getting smoother, step by step. Sadly I'm using up all the goodwill of players in my area in the process and I'm worried I'll eventually have the game figured out, but nobody willing to play it.

I'd like to know just what it was that you figured out to avoid such 'failures', and how did you do it? Was it just a question of understanding 'kickers' and 'player empowerment'?

(I take it you won't be at Odyssee-Con this weekend?)

[Graham W]

Interesting you should ask...

Earlier this year, I ran Noteworthy, which is a play-by-blog RPG developed by Allen Varney. The idea (basically speaking) is that one player starts telling a story in his blog, then the next continues the story where the first one left off, and so on, and so on.

Specifically, the game I ran was called "The Secret of ROI Sector". It had a Paranoia setting, with the players playing Troubleshooters being debriefed for a mission they never went on (so they had to make up the story of the mission during the debriefing).

If you're interested, the full text of the game is on my blog at http://www.livejournal.com/users/spencerpine/177084.html#cutid1. Funnily enough, I'd just posted that when I saw this topic.

The way the game failed was a great shame: the players had great ideas and kept setting up mysteries for other players to solve. (For example, they'd refer to "an encounter", expecting the next player to describe what the encounter was).

Unfortunately, they didn't seem to listen to each other. So they wouldn't start the story at the point at which the last player finished; they wouldn't explain the things that the last player had set up to be explained. After a while, it all got rather dull, and we all went off to do other things.

Not my finest hour, really.

[JamesDJIII]

I too tried to introduce different games and ways of playing them.

The group was not receptive to any of these changes. They were very concerned that anything that deviated from the traditional authorship patterns of the "old" would be work.

Actually this is a culmination of bad events, but personally the most painful events occured when I was the GM. I could sense that something was terribly wrong, but I lacked the knowledge and tools bring about constructive change. We had one final "Come to Jesus" meeting about what was wrong. The upshot of the discussion was that I simply "took things to seriously."

I mentioned that I felt that our gaming was growing stale and not as fun. I mentioned that I thought we could try out new RPGs and ways of playing, and see if we liked them. The ideas was not accepted, ultimately. They continued on their quest to find the one perfect system to match all of the needs of the group.

Numerous times I would ask that we have some sort of plan for games - what was going to be played, who was assuming what roles (players? GM? system? setting?). We spent a lot of nights just bullshitting about nothing. The level of energy was dropping to nothing. When we did play, I would become distraught about the techniques and attitudes at the table. I stopped having fun with my buddies.

I decided that I need to leave the old group in search of greener pastures. I occasionally stop in and chit chat, usually returning a borrowed DVD or to drop off a book. I get to see all the old faces, and be out of there before they begin to play.

I've been out there looking for new players and games. It's not easy. I have a busy life - house to look after, a growing child to nurture, career development, long term life goals, spending time with my wife - it all adds up. I didn't want to spend any more time doing things I didn't like.

I was careful to explain to the group that I was leaving for nothing but reasons of taste in the games. I keep an open invite to all of them for non-haming social activities, like coming over for dinner, or meeting for movies. I wanted them to know that I was still their friend. Not gaming with them didn't mean that was not going to change.

I want games where we got that "leopard look" after each session. I want games where we can't wait to play again. I was surprised how alien this desire was to the old group. To them, these things were nice if you get them, but were only possible, I guess, with freak chance, not concious effort. Needless to say, after reading the ideas and experiences here, I don't believe it's just chance.

[Frank T]

Hi and thanks for the replies! Joe,

I'd like to know just what it was that you figured out to avoid such 'failures', and how did you do it? Was it just a question of understanding 'kickers' and 'player empowerment'?

Two things. First, I read a bunch of actual play threads on the Forge, to see how other people handled those games. Second, I joined in an IRC round with others that were as eager as me to try out Indie Games, so the effort of having to motivate and convince dropped out. It was a "training platform", if you will.

I'd also recommend a game with a strong structure, because that makes it easier. My attempt with The Window was doomed from the start, because there was no structure at all. You cannot just tell players they may now introduce new elements into play. You need to define, somehow, who can introduce what, when and how. And you as GM should be prepared to give your players some hints and guidance to that, for they won't necessarily get the concept straight away.

Also, it probably would have been easier for me if more of my players had had GM experience. The one that took to it a little better than the others was also the only one who had GM'ed a couple of times.

(I take it you won't be at Odyssee-Con this weekend?)

Nope, I'm still strung out from GroFaFo summer rally at Hessenstein and really need a weekend off.

- Frank

[Sydney Freedberg]

I'd also recommend a game with a strong structure...

Absolutely agreed.

My most utter failures both came one summer studying Polish in Krakow, on two separate occasions when I tried to introduce -- uh -- well, two women I was kinda interested in, actually, plus a guy who was also interested in one of them* -- to gaming by way of total freeform: Basically pure Drama resolution with lots of GM fiat, me being GM. Oh, and because it was all very spur-of-the-moment, I was trying to make up setting and situation as I went along, responding to cues of what they expressed interest in. Once, with one woman and one man as players, I managed to get them to suggest a genre (Western) and some sketchy ideas for their characters, but we never went further; the other time, with one (other) woman as player, we actually got to narrating a bit back and forth, but I overrode a detail she'd narrated and we fizzled soon after that.

Part of the problem was my tentativeness in selling the idea of roleplaying at all -- and I'm still a lousy evangelist for the hobby; part of it was my not having prepped anything  -- no linear plot, no Bangs/Kickers, no NPCs, nothin'; and part of it was my assumption that the easiest way to introduce people to roleplaying was to have no rules or setting background to learn. And it's true that way makes it easier to start, but since you have to invent everything on the fly with no structure to guide you, it makes it nigh-impossible to continue.

* And Herr Doktor Professor Ron Edwards nods as he makes a few significant notations on his Kinsey-esque master survey sheet.

[ScottM]

I babbled about my struggle here and here.  Quickly recapping, I sold my group on My Life with Master, then we fumbled forward.  The setup and first sessions (written up above) were pretty good, but there wasn't much buy in to the character's points of view.  Basically, very few of the characters actually set themselves up to rebel-- they made their characters unthinkingly villainous (too much Vampire in the recent past), which diffused much of the tension and motivation.

Despite the vaguely dissatisfying game (we didn't manage an end session) they were willing to try Dogs in the Vineyard with me (almost a year later).  That one went much better (though it too had its struggles)... but that group has since dissolved.

It isn't a real horror story, but it's certainly a more blah than I'd have liked.
-- Scott

[Victor Gijsbers]

Tell me about your most utter failure in running or playing an RPG!

After years of freeform play, which didn't work very well, the first system that got me intereted enough to make me want to run it was The Pool. My players were interested, everybody seemed to like the idea of the Monologue of Victory, and I prepared to run a game.

To this day, it remains one of the great unsolved mysteries of the Universe why I thought that psychological horror that gets its bite from the GM knowing more than the players was a suitable genre.

"Uhm, yeah, you can narrate what you want, only, uh, hm, well, don't interfere with anything meaningful that has happened until now, because only I know what's up."


That was my worst judgement as a GM, I think. Or was that the time I decided to run an old AD&D scenario? (Death and fire and total destruction to all pre-made scenario's!)