Selling game play techniques to my GM

[Elysium]

I have a few GMs that I have been trying to sell some of the techniques
I have found here. I haven't yet tried any of the techniques, and so far
have met with varying levels of resistance to these changes. I want to
try something different because a lot of the stuff at the forge strikes
a chord in me, and I see a few problems in the games I'm in that seem
like CA conflict, or perhaps just conflict of authority in regards to
exploration of the SIS. I'm still unsure which CA the game play I most
like falls under, Narrativist or Simulationist.

As a side note, I'm still coming to grips with the terminology used
here. Hopefully I don't mangle it too much.

My problems selling these ideas seem to be mostly my own poor
salesmanship. I get varying reactions that seem to be 'nothing's wrong
here, stop challenging' to 'it'd be too much work to do that' to 'it
would be too stressful to do that' to seeming to listen, but getting no
real change. I've made a little progress so far, but not enough to make
any real difference so far as I can see. It could be I'm too impatient.

I do have a fair amount of fun in my games, but I see that it could be a
lot better. For me it seems to be medium to long stretches of not much
involvement with minor bursts of a lot of fun in the game.

Let me give an actual play description, then how I wish it would have
gone. This is easily the worst scene we have been involved with in a
long time. It's not exactly standard play for this GM, but he does seem
to be leaning more and more towards this style of GMing.

This particular game is 7th Sea. As such we expect to be swashbuckling
heros. We learn that an NPC our characters have come to like is going to
be executed. The GM tells the players ahead of time that there is
nothing we can do about this. Our characters are there, watching, but
the crowd is too big and we can't get up front to do anything effective.
The NPC is killed. We all gritted our teeth through the scene and let
the GM do his thing. Nobody liked it.

How I wished the scene would go would be something more like this: GM
told us that this hanging was planned, through an NPC informant. We get
there and do our hero thing. The NPC is a fate witch that had read the
future and decided that her death was the catalyst by which the
revolution her country was in could eventually be stopped (this was
during the Terror in Montaigne, roughly like the French revolution). If
we rescued her we would learn this, and then we have to decide what to
do.

Playing it out in the latter manner would have put choice back into PC
hands, and could easily have ended up in the spot the GM wanted it to go
anyway. We let her go back, get hanged, and the populace gains sympathy
for the nobility. Heck, it might have even have gotten more sympathy and
gone further than the GM had originally intended.

I have brought up that I want more player control of such plot elements.
I have brought up that I want more focus on plots that the players have
put into their characters, rather than on events that the GM comes up
with. In the middle of bringing up these points we get a surprise end to
the campaign. In the end we were going against villains we have never
met before, in a plot that's not really connected to any of our
characters.. it's just a story straight out of the 7th Sea books.

We've starting a new 7th Sea game on the same night as the surprise
announcement of the end of the old campaign, and the last story of that
game. The new game will be coming after the old one in game time, but
with new characters and a different location in the game world. I tried
to ask for shared character creation, player input before hand, and some
player directed story hooks. Instead my input is argued away by the GM
and other players as either not what the GM wants, or too much work. We
are told to just give 3 summaries of concepts, and let the GM choose one
for each player. There is no connected story for the various characters,
and no planned involvement with them. The direction of the game story,
the types of plots and the locations the GM is going to use is announced
before he has any of the character concepts.

In the previous game many of us gave several plot hooks to the GM, in
terms of our character backgrounds and such. Most of these were ignored,
never resolved, or left static... brought up as a bit of color but never
furthered in terms of resolving these plots.

Reading this seems to make him sound like a bad GM, which I don't think
he really is. I do have fun in the game, and I think he could easily do
better if he tried. I mostly blame myself for my poor salesmanship on
these ideas. I think that if he tried some of the changes to his game,
he also would enjoy them. I just can't seem to get him to try.

I've tried kicking around some scenarios in my head, but am unsure where
to go from here. Finally, a point. How do I sell these ideas to my GM?

---
David

[Moreno R.]

You could play one game as the GM yourself, SHOWING them what you mean.

[Elysium]

I have considered trying to GM again, in spite of being rather bad at it last time I gave it a go. I have a problem with finding a game that suits me. I could play a game that we have played before, but that gives me the old mechanics that are not really supporting the style of play that I think I want. Switching to a new game would be difficult for me, as I'm more than a little picky in the game setting and such. I don't care for most of the settings in games.. it takes a lot for me to have fun in spite of that, and I still lose some fun from playing in a setting I don't enjoy.

My GMs say they want to get input, but they just don't seem to respond well to the input I give. I'm not sure if it's because they wouldn't enjoy the same type of game experience as me, or if they just don't want to change, or what.

[Moreno R.]

I suggest Dogs in the Vineyard. It's really fast and easy to GMs, you can do a "story" (a town) in a single session, there are a lot of already-made Towns to play, and it is a really good show of "forge techniques"

(it is, in fact, the game they used to show me these techniques)

[Elysium]

This is one of the many games mentioned here that I think has some very  interesting sounding mechanics, from what I've heard of it. The problem is that I completely loath the setting and premise of the game. A huge amount of my enjoyment of a game comes from a setting that I enjoy playing in, and it takes a huge amount to overcome this. I loath religious extremists, and having that the focus of a game is big time anti-fun for me. I grew up in Utah, and any game that reminds me of that little corner of hell isn't welcome on my gaming shelf. :)

Burning Wheel and Riddle of Steel somewhat struck my fancy, from the  descriptions I've read. They're also a fair bit of change for me right now, but I might be willing to give one of them a try. The main problem with running rather than playing is that I suck as a GM, and the folks I game with enjoy being GMs and are good at it, in general. I just feel some clash in our gaming styles at certain points. I'm just trying to get them to experiment and try out new things to hopefully put more of what I enjoy in a game, and hopefully find something new that makes it more fun for them as well.

[Darren Hill]

About Dogs in the Vineyard: it really isn't a game about religious extremists. Reading the rules would dispel that notion instantly. Even those players who go into the game planning to play stereotypical religious extremists will be playing "real people" by the end of their first adventure.

But if you're dead set against that, I suggest Conspiracy of Shadows. It's Doom and Destiny mechanics give players the kind of plot control you mention is important to you. The system is sneaky: it looks a lot like a more traditional game in many ways, but has lots of little touches that will help ease the players into the more player-centric mindset you want to encourage. You can also read the rules for free on the website, to see if it'll suit you.
It's described as a horror fantasy game (and is perfect for Ravenloft-style games), but can be played with absolutely no changes at all as a standard fantasy game.

[Elysium]

That game seems a bit more neutral to my tastes, from the sales pitch there and a few reviews I googled on it. There is not much there that looks attractive to me, and only a few things that I minorly dislike. This is about at the level of game that I probably wouldn't turn it away if someone wanted to run it, but I wouldn't seek it out. If we're moving this into the direction of games to recommend for me to try, though, it's something that I've found nearly impossible to do for myself, in the years I've been looking. I've only found a few I liked, most notably 7th Sea and L5R, but most I don't. Even the ones that I like I have a fair number of issues with.

Something that focuses on political intrigue, doesn't have religious questions that can be reflected in RL (Mormons in DiTV and it seems a Christian overtone if not outright take off on that in Conspiracy of Shadows). I tend to shy away from (or run quickly from) the darker games. I enjoy flashy heroes, fun adventures, political machinations, low magic, renaissance-ish level tech or so for fantasy games. I enjoy other people as the villains, rather than monsters. A game of only humans in the game world would suit me just fine, but I'm not against a little other stuff at the edges.

I do a lot of reading of RPG reviews, searching for stuff that might interest me. About the only things I've come up with so far that I have not played but that sound like it might suit me are Burning Wheel (a game without a setting), The Riddle of Steel, and Transhuman Space... though I have zero idea how to actually play an interesting THS game, rather than just looking at an interesting setting.

As to the plot control, I'm still unsure about what elements of the plot I would like to have more control over, and which I would be happier to leave up to the GM (or which I would want to let players run and which I would want to keep control over were I the GM). There are a number of different elements, and I would not wish to step on toes, such as with the world setting and NPCs backgrounds and such. I'm still trying to figure out where my boundaries are for that. This is one of the reasons I'm trying to talk over things with my gaming group, to figure out these boundaries.

---
David

[baron samedi]

We'll, I'd also advise you to try DITV and maybe attempt a different setting, as suggested on www.lumpley.com... The focus of DITV, despite the pitch, is about making moral choices, not being told what choices to make (which is explicitely forbidden by the rules.) Good middle ground for introduction to Narrativism, good way to GM without too much involvement. You describe the problem, then let players handle it without interfering. Great way for them to responsibilize in taking the scenario in their hands.

Two of my players are strongly atheist and agnostic, and they did find the system quite fascinating despite a rather cold reaction to religion. I'd also say that the DITV setting is so stylized, so "surreal", that I don't find much in common with the real world (e.g. polygamy? ceremony to drive off demons?). Of course, if you're an ex-LDS, that's different. :)

You could easily turn DITV into "The Untouchables vs the Mob" for example, or "Delta Green", or even "Demon hunters in New York". There are resources available for these.

Other games could also do the trick, like My Life with Master or Polaris or Capes, but they're much more different from classical RPGs so you may scare off your "vanilla" players with them.

Good luck!

Erick

[Warren]

Yeah, I would also suggest DitV (specifically, I would dump the Old West setting and use Afraid. It's a modern supernatural horror game, by Vincent, using very similar rules to DitV -- currently in playtesting; that link gives you the playtest documents you need to modify DitV for it).

Burning Wheel might work for you, but I personally find it way too crunchy for my tastes. It does have a lot of good stuff in it, however. I can't comment on The Riddle of Steel, but I have heard good things.

If you just want to use a system you are familar with, you could try and just use the Flag Framing and Conflict Web techniques to set the game up. I don't know much about 7th Sea, but I would have thought it would fit with this technqiues quite well.

[coffeestain]

I'd suggest at least reading The Shadow of Yesterday.  I think you'll find it fits your setting tastes almost perfectly, you can read it for absolutely no dollar investment, and it's a pretty fair introduction to a variety of interesting game techniques.

That said, as far as an introductory example text, nothing beats Dogs in the Vineyard.  Even if you never play it, it's worth the read.

Regards,
Daniel

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

This discussion needs an instant overhaul. Elysium did not ask for a series of suggestions about what game to use, nor would simply landing another game book in front of this group accomplish anything, nor is such a series of suggestions what this forum is for.

Elysium, I'd like you to describe that play-situation with the witch in much, much more detail. What actually happened among the real people at the table? Was anyone trying to signal the GM that he or she was not having a good time? Was any particular player clearly having a good time, and how was that shown? Was this at the beginning of a series of connected sessions, in the middle, or toward the end?

I'd like more basic information too - who is playing? How many? How long has this group been playing together? All of these are actually important to understand and discuss your next choices or thoughts about role-playing.

Best, Ron

[Ricky Donato]

Dang, Ron beat me to it. :-)

David, listen to Ron's advice. I think I know what he's heading for, and it'll be way more useful to you than suggestions about what game to play.

[Elysium]

Thanks Ron,

First up, our gaming group. This is a group of gamers that, save for a couple people new to the group, have been gaming about in the 20-15 year range, mostly together. It is part of a larger group, with various GMs for various games, and different mix of players. They try to give each other advice, support on games, etc. Overall it's a pretty
good group to be gaming with.

I'm in three different games with this particular group, each with a different GM, and save for one of the games, those GMs as players in the other games. The 7th Sea game that had this scene in it has been going on for about a year and a half or so, meeting monthly for most of a Saturday. It's had a slight bit of turnover in that time, one player leaving and another joining the game.

I'd like to restate that this kind of scene isn't exactly standard for this GM, but I do think the general viewpoints
and style of play that caused it are still there there. He seems focused more on telling a story, and running
PCs through a plot, rather than shared story creation. It's this that I'm trying to work with him to start to change.

There were I think 6 or 7 players (not all show up at every game) and the GM there that day. 7th Sea game, our characters were in the middle of the Montaigne revolution. We had previously worked up a good rapport with the Emperor's wife, I forget her name. She was to be executed as a noble and such. Before the game started the GM announced that he knew this would suck, but that it was needed for the story. Most of the players wanted to do something to save her instead. Many voiced objections to not being at least allowed to try. Several of us complained that it wasn't very swashbuckling to do nothing. Nobody enjoyed the scene, not even the GM. I think the GM's lack of enjoyment had a lot to do with none of us having fun.

Basically we all gritted our teeth, got through the scene and went on. Everyone seemed rather grumpy at sitting through the GM going through that scene, and we knew we could do nothing about it.

We played through only a few more sessions after that. We thought it was going to be a much longer game, as we had a lot of character plot points we haven't really even started to address, much less resolve, and had seemingly a direction to go. The GM announced at the start of one game that this would be the last session. We proceeded to run an adventure directly out of the books, something this GM hadn't really done before. He usually only uses the books for a starting point and goes from there. In this last adventure we fought villains we had never met before and didn't really care about, and won the day. Some players had some fun, but nobody in the group really seemed to me to be getting into it. After that we started to make characters for a new game. We've yet to play this new game. I'm trying to get some of my desires for the game direction thought about, at least, before we start. I've had a less than successful time of it.

---
David

[abjourne]

Try asking them to really check this site out. They seem hardcore & it has potential to add to their experience & broaden their horizons. Maybe they need to learn & decide for themselves.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi everyone,

Guys, it's not time for casual advice. You don't know this group, you don't know their deal, and you don't know their game. Let David get us deeper into the situation through more dialogue.

In particular, everyone - quit trying to fix or change anyone for David's sake. This is about his choices in reality, not waving a magic wand at the group and making them into something they're not.

David, I gotta say, your description shows all the hallmarks of a long-term group of friends for whom the role-playing, in the most general sense of the term, is no longer the point. The current GM is clearly more into his story and how he wants things to turn out than he is in anything concerning the real play among the real people. I'd lay odds that some, maybe most of the other players are willing to put up with "whatever" as long as the group of friends keeps meeting in semi-regular fashion. And I wonder whether a certain amount of system-shifting is going on, in the sense of a given person getting excited about a new game (probably one with lots of supplements) and offering to GM it, for a good game "this time." That might have happened, ohhh ... let's guess twice in the last two years.

All right, I stated all of the above in very harsh, extreme terms. I'm interested - is any of that even half correct, in your view? That's what I'm shooting for. If I'm half correct or more, then I know what sort of questions and ideas I can present to you; if I'm not, then I can start over. You might have to step out of your own shoes and look upon yourself and the others as if you were a Martian anthropologist to answer fully.

Best, Ron