I wanted to try TSOY for a long time, but it's only recently that I managed to find interested players. I intended to run a one-shot, but since they were not too keen on using pre-gens, we had a first session of character creation. I gave them a fairly specific setting: an Ammenite plantation in the mangrove, they came up with one zaru acting as spiritual leader for the slave community, a ratkin "ranger" leaving in the nearby swamp and an elf acting as travelling tourist, more or less. I wanted the group to have a natural feel, so we spent the first session (which was to be the only session) trying to put together the group. The bang which was supposed to set up things in motion was that the plantation owner has brought in a bunch of irregular soldiers (which I made as scary as possible) to hunt escaped slaves and destroy the ratkin "undergound railway" that allowed them to flee.  So the slave "leader" was used as a bait, being told by the soldiers to fake an evasion to draw in the ratkins, the elf came along for the sport and the ratkin guided the two of them to his den and his family, with the hunters following the group. They are "now" holed in the den, trying to convince the ratkins to free the rest of the slaves.

I was a bit disappointed with my performance as a GM, since the players were pretty passive, and I had to be very forceful to get them moving (for instance: the soldiers announcing they will crucify one slave for each day they have to spend here). Even so, they said they had a great time, and when I proposed at the end of the session to wrap things up, they insisted to have a second session. So, maybe this post is a solution in search of a problem, but the fact is I, as one the players, would like more participation from the others.

We stopped at a fairly open situation, so I have plenty of room to maneuver from here. The most active player (as in, moving the story along) is not the slave, who just agonizes over his choices but always follows the path of least resistance, but, surprisingly, the elf, who, by design, should have very little stakes in the outcome.  How do I get the players to move the story along? Should I ease off the pressure and see if they can come up with something? Or should I intensify the pressure (my natural inclination) and throw more tough choices at them and see if one them gets them excited?

The obvious question--what are their Keys, and why aren't they taking a more of an active hand in pursuing them? (Are they aware that they are free and encouraged to do so?)

Ronny wrote:
The obvious question--what are their Keys, and why aren't they taking a more of an active hand in pursuing them? (Are they aware that they are free and encouraged to do so?)

Thierry wrote:

Ronny wrote:
The obvious question--what are their Keys, and why aren't they taking a more of an active hand in pursuing them? (Are they aware that they are free and encouraged to do so?)

For the ratkin, it is the key of the Precious, key of the Pacifist for the slave and key of the Self for the elf. They are aware becasue I insisted on it, but it is possible that it slipped their minds. In a one-shot, acquiring experience is not seen as terribly important anyway.

Sorry for the double post, meant to edit the previous one (didn't remember editing was off). The slave has the key of the Pacifist, not Conscience.

Thierry wrote:
We stopped at a fairly open situation, so I have plenty of room to maneuver from here. The most active player (as in, moving the story along) is not the slave, who just agonizes over his choices but always follows the path of least resistance, but, surprisingly, the elf, who, by design, should have very little stakes in the outcome.  How do I get the players to move the story along? Should I ease off the pressure and see if they can come up with something? Or should I intensify the pressure (my natural inclination) and throw more tough choices at them and see if one them gets them excited?

I have another question: what about the players?

I get the feeling they're just there to watch your show and you are bummed about that. What's their play history? Did you talk about how to play the game beforehand?

How do I get the players to move the story along?

Eero wrote: Readily suggest buyoffs for anybody acting or thinking about acting against a Key. Leverage the buyoff experience into something awesome, so as to make it clear to the players how the game is played.

Jasper wrote:
Does this in any way ring a bell? If so I think saying "Guys, there's no predefined story, I need your help make one" is a good start for a nice discussion.

Jasper wrote: Does this in any way ring a bell?

Remember, in this game, the experience system works--and needs to work--moment-by-moment, not in an evaluating-after-the-session fashion.

He doesn't seem "empowered" by his ability to make choices, but rather embarrassed by it.

Thierry wrote:
They are aware becasue I insisted on it, but it is possible that it slipped their minds. In a one-shot, acquiring experience is not seen as terribly important anyway.

Thierry wrote: The bang which was supposed to set up things in motion...

Thierry wrote: I was a bit disappointed with my performance as a GM, since the players were pretty passive, and I had to be very forceful to get them moving (for instance: the soldiers announcing they will crucify one slave for each day they have to spend here).

Paka wrote: Who came up with this bang with the soldiers and the plantation?

When the soldiers made that announcement, what was the player reaction?  I don't even mean character but I mean player.

They know that they can spend XP to get kewl new powers and that they can cash out a Key whenever they like for a new one?

Paka wrote:
They know that they can spend XP to get kewl new powers and that they can cash out a Key whenever they like for a new one?

They know it in theory, but don't really realize it in practice, I think. I avoided pointing out the situations where "had you done that, you would have an XP", but maybe I should to get them starting.

Hey Thierry,

I have some counter-balancing advice. Everything that everyone has written so far is quite accurate in content, but I'd like to draw attention to your timing.

You, as GM and as the guy who's introducing this game to them, have a primary concrete obligation to them before you can call them on their primary obligation (or expectation). Your obligation is to show that you're not a dick. Yes, this may seem like a basic and meaningless point after all these years of dialogue at the Forge ... but to them, it's an open question. Is this guy a dick? Is this game going to be worth any of the social time and effort, much less learning curve, that we're devoting to it? And if not, then why don't we just suffer with the system that we know?

Once you fulfill that obligation and simply continue to GM as you're GMing, that is to say, providing neat situations mainly on your own until they start kicking in with their own situations, then you can expect them to start playing more in line with what the rules offer.

But ... if you start pressuring them with your obligations before they learn that you're not a dick, guess what they will conclude? They'll think that your expectations are disapproval and bullying. They'll think, in fact, that you are a dick.

This has happened a lot with people taking games like Dust Devils, TSOY, Sorcerer, and even TROS to other people who aren't used to such things and indeed have been trained out of any perception that they're even possible. These games do not play themselves. They require people who can get into the reward mechanics and start utilizing them as motors. So when you bring them to people who willing but simply not yet able even to see the reward mechanics as a possibility, you have to be patient. Give them more than just a single session. Give them a couple, or three, and be patient. Trust the game to do its job, because it will, when anyone even tries.

Again, I agree with all the advice you're being given and I think you should apply it ... but slowly. In my experience, gamers are hyper-sensitive to perceived criticism and do much better with one friendly suggestion per session, than with a whole manual of Forge-freak pressure thrown at them before they can even stammer out, "I hit him." Take your time. Enjoy the game, build the NPCs into characters you really like to play, and practice your scene framing and your general enjoyment of imagining stuff together.

I think the attention to timing will make the advice work.

Best, Ron

The natural inclination for a roleplayer, when confronted with potential emotional investment, is to distance himself from it by one of various means (myguyism, disruptive play, whatever). You as a fellow player should set the example by taking the situations and choices you set up very seriously: comment on the choices of other players, speculate on the consequences and in general, give out social signals that make it clear that you expect firm answers. Traditional GM neutrality often becomes GM indifference; your job is to combat this expectation with your behavior.

We had the second (and closing) session yesterday. It was mainly player driven this time, which is a good thing since I had run out of ideas myself to shake them out. I recapped the main rules, insisting on Keys and how XPs could be spent during play.

To start with a bang, the soldiers caught up with them while they were trying to organize the ratkins, and devastated the village, killing or driving away the rats and catching the slave and elf (who both pretended that they were abducted and were still working within the original plan). The ratkin player used her sneak skill to follow and eavesdrop on the group, but she really kick-started things by buying off her Key of the Precious and saying she was now bent on revenge after witnessing the fate of the village. Basically, from this point on, I had no more work to do, except I gave the ratkins allies. Since the player had them portrayed as fun-loving pacifist, I added the support of the nearest ratkin tribe, who were more into looting and killing.

Elf and slave agreed on their story: there is no escape route, it is a scam perpetuated by the rats to drive slaves in the swamp and rob/eat them. The soldiers spare the slave's life conditioned on him reporting that back to his flock. The ratkin manages to pass the message that something is up, so once in the camp, the slave gets the elf to poison the soldiers. I wanted to give the slave the opportunity to makes his grand gesture by inciting revolt or whatever, but he let the opportunity drop.

It all converged on a bloody ending, with rats fumigating, then attacking the sick soldiers, the slave nobly dying trying to protcet his flock by disarming the veteran captain, the ratkin helping the fleeing (outmatched) and the elf playing his selfish key by using the debacle to retrieve artefacts of interest from the wealthy mansion, only to be faced with a rogue ratkin and slaughtered.

Debriefing, it was interesting to see how protective of their character they felt, even though it was a one shot. They stuck to the safe route whenever possible, even when they would have earned XPs by doing otherwise.

Hmm, that self protective play does seem to be reflective of the issue Ron brought up.

In regards to that issue - further into it than them learning your not a dick, is that were these people willing to game with someone who they don't hold any amount of trust in (trusting you not to be a dick)?

That's kind of dangerous because if their willing to buy into play without trusting you to some small degree to begin with, why would they even start looking to see if they can trust you, as play progresses? They wont - they are satisfied with non trust 'play'. Even if you show signs of being trustworthy, if their not looking for it, it wont have any chance of changing play behaviour.

Did any of them look for signs of whether they could trust you to some small degree, before the game? Small talk for example - talk about the whether or sports is often a way of judging how you think and then thinking "Ah, I understand him a bit better now...". Its not about big trust straight away, just them looking for a small foundation which can be grown upon, if your not a dick, as Ron puts it. Those people will pay off.

We get along fine, but I think that, whatever Key they might be buying, the main drive for them is still to solve my "puzzle", i.e. find the safe way out whenever I throw something at them.  I deemed feasible all the ideas they came up with and tried to make them interesting, so hopefully they'll be a bit less guarded in the future.