I'm running this in the Marvel Universe Role-Playing Game system. We've just played the first adventure last night, but I plan for this to continue for at least 6 more sessions. It's going to be a more or less episodic campaign, as it is just meant to highlight the mysteries the characters have solved, though this group usually plays the game through  accounting for all game time that passes.

Here is a brief write-up of the game on another forum. And here is the thread from which I was working when writing this up. I worked up a quick form that I could fill out to make the whole thing easier, and to focus my mind on one piece at a time, which I'll probably post a link to in that forum (since this forum doesn't seem like the best place for it) as soon as I think I have it pretty well worked out.

This was my first time running a game, but that didn't worry me too much because both Gene and Josh have a vested interest in me becoming comfortable in the GM Chair (Gene because he has been relegated to permanent GM due to no one else wanting to step up to the role, and Josh because he hasn't gotten to play across from Gene in a long time, and they had a pretty good chemistry going between their character types when they last did so). The group (including those who weren't there that night) have been gaming together for about 20 years, though I have only joined up in the last year and a half. We used to meet every week, but right now we're down to every other week. We play around Genes pool table and usually run for about 4-6 hours, or whenever the majority of the group just has to leave.

This game is being run on alternate weeks to the "main" game, and only lasted about 2 hours till the players had the case solved (I knew at an hour and a half that any further investigation would lead to them finding the culprit).  I really do think the game went well, certainly better than I would have expected given my lack of experience (including the game I ran last night I have only about 21 sessions in a series of disconnected games under my belt).

To be honest, the systems mechanics didn't come up all that often. I could have written it more into the campaign, but this was meant more to show myself that I could run a game, and to show them how this style of game is run. The players got into character really well (think actor stance) and stayed there, which is about par for the course. They were also really good about communicating what they want during the game, rather than letting the lack of it ruin the experience (specifically when my own tendency towards pawn stance would come up). An example... They have just gotten back from the crime scene with the one piece of solid physical evidence (a cigarette with the perps saliva on it). The forensics expert (such as they have) takes the cigarette back to his lab. I say something to the effect of "I assume that you test the ashes, open the cigarette, etc..." at which point the player interrupts me and says "I'd really like to role-play this out". Certainly a reasonable request so we backed up and role played it.

Of course that brings up one of my real problems. Getting into character. An example of my trouble with that is after they catch the perp (not red-handed per say, but one of the characters basically fills him with fear till he spills his guts). I just couldn't get my head around how the NPC would explain himself. So instead I gave them a synopsis of what his motivations were. That worked out okay in this instance, but it goes deeper than that. Whenever a character I'm running has information to impart to the other PC's, it takes me forever to get my head together. Example, in the Exalted game we're running as the "main" game: My Abyssal Death Knight is asked by one of the Dragons in the group about the... Is it called the harvester of sorrows? The Giant abyssal Mech left by lookshy by the Lover Clad in the Rainment of Shadow. Now it took me about 5-8 minutes to absorb the info that he would have, and then about 30 minutes to figure out what he would actually say.

Another problem that was brought to my attention is that I didn't seem to have any sort of emotional attachment to, or empathy for the characters. Now part of that is due to the subject matter (These are the dregs of society who need defense from crimes they are accused of, or which are leveled at them, and they can't get this because they were in the middle of a different crime. I just can't bring myself to care about them, or what happens to them. Maybe with time... Or maybe I'll have to find another group in the same place, hmm...) However, this seems to be the case with all of my characters (N/PC). For instance, in rifts I was playing a Dwarven Technowizard who was a coward due to having seen his village destroyed by a Dragon. But after about one session he was basically only responding to the occasional technological wonder (he was from earth, transfered to the three galaxies, and so everything was eons beyond what he had seen). I realize that this is probably a perfectly acceptable way to play, but it doesn't work in our group (If I'm reading the essays right, I'm a Pawn-Stance favoring Gamist in a group of Author-stance favoring Simulationists) and I would like to attempt a style that better fits what the rest of the group is doing.

As regards the clues, when presenting the clues I am told I provided too much information. Example, the cigarette: I said something to the effect of "The ashes are very dry and powdery, which suggests that the tobaco was cheap" further examination of the tobaco confirmed this for them. I know why the players were bothered by this, they want "just the facts", and I want to provide this for them. However, I'm trying to point them in the right direction, and don't want a miscommunication or incorrectly stated fact to lead them in the wrong direction.

Lastly I'm concerned about how I framed the scenes. One thing mentioned by the players was "show, don't tell", but I'm not sure how to do that. Example, I'm presenting Natisha's entrance (which granted was fairly cheesy): The emotions you're feeling from those around you are blank, empty, numb. From a table about 100 feet away you feel a surge of emotion. A woman stands up and starts walking toward you, her face awash with despair, frustration, (don't remember what the third was), but all you feel from her direction is focus (he has Empathy as an ability, and can feel the emotions of those around him). She starts off walking, and speeds up as she gets closer. At about 50 feet she is pushing people aside, and at 25 ft she is running, knocking those around her down. As she reaches you, she passes out." .  I'm not really sure what could be done to make that more of a "show" than a "tell"

When the adventure was done, the players seemed hungry for the next adventure. They couldn't wait to see what the next mystery would be. I would have thought they'd be bored, since this one was so easy but I think they liked that it was different than the normal campaigns (the information they had as players, is the same that they had as PC's, which eliminated the concern of metagaming, which is a cardinal sin in our group, yet another point where my preferences are different than that of the group.. ah well).

Here are the basic things I wanted to run by the forum:

1) Is there some trick to getting and staying in character?
2) How do you construct a character that you can become emotionally attached to? NPC's in general, PC's in specific.
3) How do you design clues without leading the players?
4) How do you "show" rather than "tell" when running something like this?

Argh.. When I said "Author" stance, I meant "Actor" stance. Sorry for any mixup this causes.