ARRGGH! Overcoming players' phobias

[Scripty]

Thanks, Ron. I have read that thread before and thought to myself: "Sheesh, what a train wreck!" Reading it did help prepare me to not to fly off the handle in this situation. There were a couple of days when I really felt like just giving people a piece of my mind, but I opted to be patient and wait until the cards were laid out (and my head was clearer) before I chimed in with my observations. As it turns out, I doubt I'll have to chime in at all.

I agree that 3 players is a great number. I prefer to look at what I have than judge myself by the standards that others judge me by. For some reason, people in this area think that if you don't have 8-10 people showing up at your game, then you either suck as a GM or your game is dying. It's funny, but everywhere else I've lived 10 players has equalled a LARP, not a table top game. I've run in the past for 1-5 players, but it's only here that I've ever had to run for excesses of 6 or more. I would take 3 open-minded and engaged players over 13 twinks any day.

But that's just me. I'm very happy that these three players have stayed on. It's much more intimate (and I don't mean physical... EWW!) and there's a lot more friendship, engagement and less "Me, GM. You, players." which again is something I hadn't encountered since my high school days (before I moved back here, of course).

I'm excited that I'm getting to run HQ. As per our usual campaigns, I gave the (remaining) players the choice of genre/setting. I offered to continue our Feng Shui/Matrix campaign or to play in the Midnight setting, Hyborea, or Glorantha (using the HQ rules). The players chose Hyborea for some good old chop 'em up Conan fun.

Needless to say, I will be reading Sword & Sorcerer religiously prior to starting this series of episodic adventures (gotta stay true to the REH).

I think this campaign will be rewarding and it will be a great introduction to how the HQ rules work. Once they are on familiar ground, the players, I think, will be more open to playing in an unfamiliar setting. And, if we enjoy ourselves (which I hope we do), hopefully we will attract like-minded individuals to our sessions, although I'm looking to be more stringent upon accepting new members. These guys deserve as much.

Thanks again for all the kind words and support. I ranted. You guys helped me work it out and be mature about it. That's way cool.

EDIT: grammatical errors. me type fast but not think much good.

[Scripty]

To me this is standard social insecurity stuff and not really about the game at all.

My wife reached the same conclusion. I prefer not to stagnate in my mental abilities, though. But that sometimes makes me an anomaly as I'm willing to try means that fit my end goal better and leave the familiar behind if it does not serve those purposes. The "owner" DM's real forte is 2nd edition D&D, but even he doesn't know everything about it. I'm a novice at 2nd edition. I sort of missed that whole boat. I was too busy playing Paranoia, Call of Cthulhu and WEG Star Wars to really bother with another version of D&D (for the record I owned AD&D but secretly preferred my old box sets). But even I, who have only cracked a 2nd edition book owned by another player, can spot when this DM is just pulling things out of his backside, which can sometimes cause some real "logjams" with other players at the table. Personally, as a player, I like to be easygoing and give GMs a wide latitude. But sometimes, even I have felt he's gone too far. (e.g. GM: "You can't cast that!" Player: "Why not?" GM: "Well, you can cast that but it's not going to work!" or by turning PCs into stone, and leaving them that way, for multiple game sessions. Thankfully, I was only turned to stone for one session and sat through it politely. I told him to call me up when the party had gotten me fixed (next session I was fixed). But another player, who shared my fate, sat around for three sessions (the one I missed and one further) as a statue. To be fair, he was only half-statue for the third one. GM ruled there wasn't enough potion.)

He also tends to reset his campaigns once players reach about 5th level (which is just when competency starts to pick up). I suppose he could feel like the resident 2nd edition expert, but it seems more to me to involve issues of comfort, control and a bent towards illusionism, which of course brings us back to the insecurity issues that you brought to light.

The real kicker is he's very creative, imaginative and favors what I recognize to be a narrativist approach as a player. He likes to be engaged in the story as a player and quickly protests if he feels protagonism is weakening (although he doesn't refer to the concept by that term). In truth, the games I've run for his group have been the only games (run by another person) that he's ever complimented (to my knowledge) which, admittedly, is a big step for him.

I had always pegged him as a dead ringer for HQ, Sorcerer or Donjon. I was wrong and that only added to my frustration with his attitude and spreading flat out lies about my choice of games and DM'ing skills (or lack thereof). Recently, these false assertions are coming to light as the players remember "Hey, Scripty's not so bad. We usually have fun whatever he runs." As a DM, the "owner" is heavy Sim with a Plot Hammer that can be quite overbearing at times, and I approach the games from that standpoint rather than my normal Narr leanings. As a whole, I like the group. There are a few people in it that aren't in the other groups with whom I play/run and they are really nice people. But the politics of this situation have soured me so that it's hard for me not to feel it pressing in the back of my mind at this time.

Stepping away seems to be the best decision for me. Besides, my wife deserves dinner at a nice restaurant. And maybe some flowers too. I appreciate the insight, Valamir.

EDIT: clarification of the statue thing. realized it didn't make sense. i was trying to summarize and wound up being completely nonsensical. so i elaborated further.