Real Soon Now (tm) Im going to test this concept on a group of friends http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forge/index.php?topic=29532.0  Yes, actual play, wowee.

The link is to the 'back-story generator' idea I had.  The game consisting of alternating phases of 'story' punctuated with 'challenges'.  The challenge phase is gamist and the story phase is there to give the challenges  some context and continuity.  And this just recently occurred to me - thats pretty much what the GM in a gamist RPG is there for.  That and providing opposition during challenges. 

Personally I like playing RPGs more than GMing them, so Im thinking that if the backstory generator pretty much takes care of one of the GMs jobs, then maybe I can do away with a GM, or at least one player having to be 100% the GM.  I just need  to work out how to provide opposition during challenges, without one person having to assume totally that responsibility as their part in the game.

OK, so the main thing about the story phase is that it is required to lead the characters to the next challenge - set up the context of that challenge as in : what is the challenging situation and why is it occurring and often: what are your characters goals during the challenge?  I think I have that pretty much covered without a GM at all (see the link).

However, during the challenge... How to avoid a GM?  somebody has to establish the detail of what happens.  If a player says 'my character attacks the orc scout', who decides if the orc scout flees or stands to fight - if it fights, how good is it at fighting?  If he flees, what are the immediate consequences? etc..etc..

A rotating GM is a possibility, but what if all players are involved in the challenge? 

any ideas?

Many RPGs have random encounter tables. So, if you're in a city and somebody decides to just explore, roll a d20 or whatever and suddenly a gang of misfit were-goblins attack with cattle prods and spitwad shooters.

You can take this idea to the next level and have encounter randomizers. The nature of the challenge determines which table or whatnot to use, and then a series of possible actions are decided by die roll. Viola, no GMing needed.

Another way to go would be to make basic decision trees, similar in nature to AI coding for video games. An example might be something like:
Does X see PC?
-Yes
-- Attack!
--- Does PC fight back?
---- Yes
----- Is Health below 35%?
------ Flee!
-No
-- Stand still.

For ease of reading I left out No's in areas that would require them. I'm sure you get the idea.

I cant imagine any elegant way to make that work, and anyway, I dont think it would feel right for the challenge situation to be arbitrary.  No, a human brain(s) has to do the job. 

Maybe that is answering my own question then - either a GM is a necessary evil, or players have to chip in and temporarily take on the GMs role.

But how to manage that, especially since a particular player is likely to have a character in the challenge situation?

I've managed to play DMPCs in a ton of different systems, so I don't see why having a character involved in a situation is an inherent problem. The general gist of the text should be "don't favor yourself" and that should be enough to keep the honest folks honest.

The dishonest ones, on the other hand . . . :)

I think that a lot of players would balk at a game where they have to take on the GM role, even if only for a single encounter per session. It's best if that's completely disguised (text makes it sound like they're not really a GM) if you're going to try and get people to do it, because a large number of people freeze up when they're put in charge.

(I think in my gaming groups the vast majority had at most 2 GMs and everyone else were just players. There's only one notable exception where everyone took turns.)

Stefoid, have you played any games that are GMful, or at least lack a central GM?
If you haven't played Polaris yet, I cannot praise it highly enough for an *excellent* example of players swapping roles like hats, and providing adversity for one another without having to hold back at all.
It's likely that playing this game will give you some good ideas on how to apportion responsibilities.

Hi Stefoid,

I'll second Polaris as a game to check out.  Also 1001 Nights, Breaking the Ice, and Rune are good games to look at for "switching GM roles".  If you'd like to look at games with no GM at all, that work really well, take a look at Universalis, and also Capes.  Both work very well by pushing player motivation a bit above character motivation, so that there's good reasons to set up conflicts and the combination of players making and resolving conflicts produces really interesting play.

Chris

OK, will do, thanks!

OK, Ive read some reviews of the games suggested. They certainly stirred the pot.

One of the things that did come to light, was something I assumed I would get naturally from my game: immersion.  But when you have to combine GMing with playing and also give over much more narrative control to the players than games Im used to, you risk diluting immersion.  Its just something I didnt think about.

Another idea that occurred leading on from this (immersion is important) was: OK, so what if we go with the GM getting immersion too?  The GM plays a role.  My general idea of a GMs job is an impartial god-like power.  In Polaris, other players dont take on impartial god-like opposition with an eye to being 'harsh but fair'.  They take on opposing roles of something that is trying to bring you down.  That is a much more entertaining kind of 'GMing' than the traditional one.

What games out there, like Polaris, give the 'GM' an adverserial role to play, rather than an impartial god-like one?  Because that might work for me.  The story phase defines the challenge situation more or less, so the GM's role during the challenge is to make decisions on the part of the opposing NPCs and those decisions will be based on the NPCs own goals.  When the opposition to the characters goals are environmental, a GM isnt needed - because the environment doesnt make decisions, you either overcome it or you dont.

Its only when the challenge involves decision making and reactions on the part of NPCs that a GM steps up and plays that role.

Not a traditional role-playing game, but Descent pits the GM against the players. Rules for the boardgame are available from Fantasy Flight's site.

My Life With Master is about adversarial, unhealthy relationships.
Agon is explicitly a challenge-game, wherein it's the GM's job to defeat you.

OK, so what if we go with the GM getting immersion too?  The GM plays a role.  My general idea of a GMs job is an impartial god-like power.  In Polaris, other players dont take on impartial god-like opposition with an eye to being 'harsh but fair'.  They take on opposing roles of something that is trying to bring you down.  That is a much more entertaining kind of 'GMing' than the traditional one.

Hi Stefoid,

But when you have to combine GMing with playing and also give over much more narrative control to the players than games Im used to, you risk diluting immersion.

Abkajud wrote:
My Life With Master is about adversarial, unhealthy relationships.
Agon is explicitly a challenge-game, wherein it's the GM's job to defeat you.

OK, so what if we go with the GM getting immersion too?  The GM plays a role.   My general idea of a GMs job is an impartial god-like power.  In Polaris, other players dont take on impartial god-like opposition with an eye to being 'harsh but fair'.  They take on opposing roles of something that is trying to bring you down.  That is a much more entertaining kind of 'GMing' than the traditional one.

What do you mean by "immersion" here? It sounds different from the common "getting into character" meaning, as though you mean "I immerse myself in a clearly delineated role that I play in the group dynamic". Can you elaborate?

Chris_Chinn wrote:
Hi Stefoid,

But when you have to combine GMing with playing and also give over much more narrative control to the players than games Im used to, you risk diluting immersion.

You should really go play 1001 Nights, Polaris, or Breaking the Ice.  You're making an assumption here that's not necessarily true.

Do you have any specific steps/ideas for handling opposition in your game, even if it's half baked?  Otherwise it sounds like you need to do some thinking about your game and some research, before anyone can talk in a concrete way that would be useful for your design.

Chris

Like, who decides when to pick up the dice? who has narrative control when describing explorative actions by the characters within the challenge environment?

yes, increasingly its looking like a particular player must take on that responsibility, which is of course the GM :(