Topic: Why i stepped down from the GM's chair
Started by: arxhon
Started on: 3/8/2004
Board: Actual Play
On 3/8/2004 at 11:59pm, arxhon wrote:
Why i stepped down from the GM's chair
I recently stepped down from the GM's chair for a game of Solar Exalted. The reasons for this are two fold:
1. I am swamped with college homework stuff
2. I wanted to see what things were like from the other side of the screen and see what kinds of things i could do to improve my own role as a GM.
This thread is intended to be occasionally updated with my discoveries and views, unless Ron and co. would prefer that i start a new one every couple of weeks.
Thus far, we've only played 2 sessions, but i'm learning already. Anyway, what i've learned so far is this:
1. Provide a little more color description for the players. I'm guilty of saying things like 'You arrive in town." and leaving it there.
Example: We arrive at a tower with a "sign that indcates that one of the mercenary companies operates from it." Immediately i am wondering "How tall is it? What is it made of? What is on the sign? What is the name of the mercenary company?"
2. I've been moving away from the "GM plot" for some time and incorporate character motivations more (from the GM perspective), but i find it difficult to figure out what the players want to do. I ran TRoS for a bit and found that this game is excellent in winkling out player goals (become a king, avenge my family's death, etc).
Example: With my character, i've provided so many things for the GM to play with that we could run an entire campaign based only on his motivations. On the other hand, the other players have provided none (one is a "hunter" from the north that can summon demons and the other is a 12 year old Dynasty noble). What this may mean is that my character is the "focus" and the other two are "sidekicks", for good or for bad. I don't know yet.
How that all works out will be interesting.
Additionally, i'm kind of bored with the current GM plot: capture a thief and lay to rest a hungry ghost that only she knows the remains' whereabouts while two separate groups want to take the thief away. One group, comprised of a Solar sorcerer and a whack of snakemen, mind controls her, and the motives of the other (apparently outcaste Dragonblooded and mercenaries in the employ of Nexus, who we also currently work for) are as yet unknown. I'm not grumbling about it, but i'd rather be moving forward on "my story". Perhaps this is selfish of me? Maybe there is some kind of "backseat GM syndrome" manifesting there.
It's not that i'm not having fun. I am. I'm having a grand old time, actually.
The GM has made a few poor calls, but i haven't quibbled about them, so that's points for me, i guess.
I have discovered that i enjoy all three aspects of GNS (gasp!). I think that Exalted may satisfy all three, even though it isn't necessarily geared toward Narrativism.
The Exalted charm and chargen system is heavily Gamist; the more you can twink your character the better. In a way, Exalted supports this. I like combining Charms together into brutal combos and figuring out the best way to get what i want.
I find that i want to explore the setting and the character as much as possible. Are there strange customs in Nexus that will get us in trouble? What are the roofs of the houses made of? How much money can i get from selling slaves to the Guild? I want to know, and i want them to impact our game. I'm adding customs and traditions to my character and utilizing them in play, invariably in mid game, to see what happens and to make the game more interesting.
Narrativism isn't explicitly supported by the system, but i strongly feel it could be possible. I recently read the Story Now essay (good stuff, BTW, and i feel that i went a long way to solidifying my understanding of this concept) and forwarded it to the other members of the group. I haven't gotten feedback on it yet, other than "it's real wordy, man".
That's about it for now.
The big surprise? Enjoying the Gamist aspect of Exalted. I normally decry "minmaxing" characters as a GM, but it seems to be working out so far for the other players, as well as myself (not that i went nuts with it).
To quote someone from RPGnet: "Exalted is like some kind of alchemical engine that takes the lead of powergaming and transforms it into cinematic roleplaying gold." Is this true? Maybe...and i want to find out.
Keepin' ya posted,
Chris Safruik
On 3/9/2004 at 3:32pm, Matt Wilson wrote:
RE: Why i stepped down from the GM's chair
1. Provide a little more color description for the players. I'm guilty of saying things like 'You arrive in town." and leaving it there.
Example: We arrive at a tower with a "sign that indcates that one of the mercenary companies operates from it." Immediately i am wondering "How tall is it? What is it made of? What is on the sign? What is the name of the mercenary company?"
In the two groups I play in right now, the filling in of details is often a player activity. "Ooh, I imagine the tower being kind of stocky, like a defensive line player," and so on. It's fun and takes a lot of burden off the GM.
On 3/9/2004 at 3:49pm, Aman the Rejected wrote:
Re: Why i stepped down from the GM's chair
arxhon wrote: Example: We arrive at a tower with a "sign that indcates that one of the mercenary companies operates from it." Immediately i am wondering "How tall is it? What is it made of? What is on the sign? What is the name of the mercenary company?"
The way I've been trying to handle this without overloading my gamers is to do a 3 second test. If, after 3 seconds of my new scene description the players aren't talking or only lightly talking, I segue into new descriptions of details. If, after 3 seconds, the characters are scrambling about looking at this and that and making rolls, then I let the players discover their own details and relay it to the party, a kind of verbal treasure (and a reward for those with high ranks in given skills).
This, however, isn't always a concept available during combat, but I try and never let HPs suffice for an answer (You dealt 32HP of damage!). Recently, I've begun asking them where they were aiming or what part they hit.
Hope this helps!
Faithfully Yours,
Aman the Rejected
On 3/10/2004 at 7:18pm, WDFlores wrote:
RE: Why i stepped down from the GM's chair
Hello,
Have you read Chris Chinn's (Bankuei's) old column at rpg.net called Ways to Play? I've been pointing a lot of folks there lately and they've found it a helpful guide to applying some of the ideas here at The Forge.
Cheers,
- W.
On 3/10/2004 at 8:53pm, stingray20166 wrote:
My experience
With my character, i've provided so many things for the GM to play with that we could run an entire campaign based only on his motivations. On the other hand, the other players have provided none (one is a "hunter" from the north that can summon demons and the other is a 12 year old Dynasty noble). What this may mean is that my character is the "focus" and the other two are "sidekicks", for good or for bad. I don't know yet.
I wrote a fairly detailed backstory for a dwarf character for a DD3E game, including that he had served on a dwarven merchant ship, retired and that he was now adventuring to discover lost knowledge. He's 51st or 52nd in line of succession to the local dwarven king. I thought this would help the GM.
Since reading the Forge, I discovered that I may have been pushing too much "director stance" stuff at him. For instance, I had written that he had a house, a small pony to ride and a pack of hunting dogs. This was nixed by the GM (because it was "too much for a 1st level character" and I was mad. But really, it was my fault for not finding out constraints ahead of time. OK, it was kind of his fault for not discussing it with us ahead of time, but he doesn't read the Forge. :-)
Now that I've read about and understand more about Kickers and bangs, I feel like I could work with the GM to add more to the game. Other players seem to be losing interest so this might be the perfect opportunity to try and help jump-start the game.
On 3/12/2004 at 4:37am, Malechi wrote:
RE: Why i stepped down from the GM's chair
Not to try and high-jack this thread but I had some observations of my own GM style and how its evolved recently.
Originally I was really big on players creating a detailed backstory. I'd reward this with XP in the game and if you came up with it, you could have it. So no nixing of packs of wild dogs or houses or castles etc. I thought it was interesting and it really helped flesh out the world we were playing in.
Since reading more here on the forge and more importantly, since playing TROS, I've come to regard the detailed backstory as a hindrance, rather than a help in the way games are going. I read somewhere here on the Forge(probably one of the essays) that players who dilligently write out uber-detailed backstories are doing so because they feel that they aren't getting a chance to play out interesting stories in game. That may or may not be the case, but it made me think about all the games I've played in and run where it *actually* was the case. Its hard to say whether a detailed backstory and an interesting character are necessarily mutually obliged or exclusive but I've noticed lately that even the loner characters seem to be creating the most interesting stories in my games as they evolve from dullness to fully fledged protagonists...the interesting stories happen in play and thats far more rewarding than a piece of fiction written outside of the scope of the game. (IMHO of course ;) )
cheers
Jason K.
On 3/12/2004 at 12:32pm, Valamir wrote:
RE: Why i stepped down from the GM's chair
That might have been this RPG.net rant of mine
On 3/12/2004 at 3:52pm, stingray20166 wrote:
RE: Why i stepped down from the GM's chair
Yeah, that's where I read it! Thanks, Ralph.
Our character will never be as cool, will never be as driven by passion, will never have moments as sublime in play as we want them to. So instead we write those moments out into our backgrounds.
This was exactly what I was afraid of when I gave up the GM's chair -- that playing wasn't going to be as fulfilling as GMing. So I "copped out" and played the game before I ever gave the game a chance.
Too bad I was right, about that particular game anyway. It was heavily sim and I wanted more narrative. The only relationship I gained during the game was taken away the same session that it was introduced.
We're recovering, though. I introduced them to Universalis and while it wasn't a complete success it started people thinking.
I think I'm going to end up taking up the GMs chair again. The truth is that no one is very happy with the current Sim/Gamist D&D game, but no one knows why because "that's the way we've always played." Never mind that the one non-gamer friend who played for a while has now quit out of boredom. I think I could get that person back with Sorceror or Heroquest (HQ run more nar than sim).