This exact message is posted at rpg.net. A kind user suggested I post it here for additional comments/suggestions.
++++++

Going Native

Assume you're in my situation:

You love RPGs. It's like being a skirt-chaser in a sorority -- the guy's got to at least flirt with every woman that passes by, even if he's got one he sticks with most of the time.

You have a terrible memory. Basic rules are fine, basic setting is fine, but you just can't reach any real depth in many games. There's just so many out there vying for your attention, with so many good ideas. You can't hold all the setting information in your head, let alone all the rules. You rely heavily on your players to assist you or remind you of rule nuances relevant to their play.

You find yourself GMing quite a bit lately, but all your adventures seem hollow to you. Though the players enjoy the plots and their characters, it feels empty to you. There's no feeling of "living the adventure," even through your NPCs. It's not like it was when you were back in college, when the only big game was DnD, and people were differentiated by how well they ran their game, not what game they ran.

You're fickle, but you know everything's just a matter of willpower. You think if you buckle down, you can become a pro at just one game. That's right: just one. You've got to pick one and stick with it. You can play anything you want, but when you run, and you run deep, you run a single game.

Is this the solution?

- If so, are you obliged to pick a mainstream game so that you'll have players, shrugging off so much else that appeals to you?

- If so, do you hybridize or run a given game pure as published? I mean, I've rewritten Kult to use the fantastic Blue Planet rules, but never actually run it. What a waste of energy.

- If so, do you suffer without players until you find those actually interested in playing that game? For example, if you choose to become an Agone "expert," should you not run games/clutter your mind with non-Agone things, and instead patiently wait for players to attend your recruitment efforts? You simply don't have the capacity to run more than one game with any depth, and you don't want your GMing to become shallow and monotonous.

- If so, how do you keep from picking up the "next best thing"? Yes, willpower, of course, but is it worth the strain? You want to support the industry, but then again, you need to retain your sanity, and make sure that the money you spend actually gets used. You have almost 10 feet of gaming materials divvied up among nearly 70 different game systems/settings. The only DnD settings I've bought into are Al-Quadim, Lankmar, and Ravenloft. And rest assured that you've owned at least twice as many more systems and gotten rid of them over the years because you lost interest/grew out of them. Many new purchases are simply boxed after a quick skim and remain unread because you haven't got the time. What a shame.

======
Has anyone "Gone Native" to alleviate the stress of being unable to keep up with progress in the industry? I'm right on the verge, I tells ya. It's not that I want to give up gaming, or sell all my unused stuff. It's just that I want to exert some control over my crazed consumerism that prevents me from actually enjoying the things that I purchase. I can do it -- I just have to make a decision about it.

I can only do so much in a day. I love my boardgames, my card games, my TiVo, my RPGs. Oh, yeah, and my wife. On top of all that, I've got a bit of completist in me, so if I buy into something small, I have to get EVERYTHING for it. For example, I own EVERYTHING for Kult (except Kult 3E, which didn't strike my fancy at all). That would be every single collectible card for the game, newsletters and ezines, modules, sourcebooks, posters, anything I could get my hands on. I'm not crazy enough to complete, say, DnD. But I have every Ravenloft publication (modules, novels, and sourcebooks) with non-duplicated effort (don't have the RedBox).

And jeez, but it'd be nice to feel like I can buy a pair of pants without thinking that that money could buy me the next best game.

Sigh. What would you do if you had this problem? Therapy isn't the answer -- it just costs gaming money. It's all about willpower, and I've got plenty of that, as soon as I make a decision.

And you all get to be a part of it... Wheee! Am I even making sense or have I gone over the edge?

As a postscript, I know you aren't me, but that's the whole point of roleplaying, ain't it?

I don't see your problem. Hell, you have money to buy games AND pants. There are people in this world starving to death as I type this.

Now, I'm not trying to be insensitive but all you need is some perspective. Take a breath, take a step back and look at your situation in the BIG PICTURE. So you're a little obsessive-compulsive when it comes to games, so what. Label yourself eccentric and go on about your business.

And remember, if you find this advice distasteful, it was free. I'm not a therapist.

-Chris

I understand your problem Rum. I have far more games on my shelf than I could ever know well enough to GM. The best advice (though I shudder to utter these words) might be to concentrate on a system like GURPS or FUDGE which would allow you to run the maximum variety of games while focusing on mastering only 1 set of rules.

IMO they don't handle the different games as well as seperate non generic systems would...but you had a very specific problem, so you may just have to settle for 2nd best in that regard.

On the other hand, if there is a certain type of game you'd be interested in running most often, you can just find the best possible system for that and master that one. Though I suspect that someone who combines Kult with Blue Planet probably has some genre spanning interests.

For my money, I'd go with FUDGE. Its alot cheaper than GURPS and much easier to master because there aren't as many crunchy bits to learn. Plus there are a wide variety of home grown settings that use FUDGE already to choose from.

Personally, I think the best solution would just be to suck it up and master a bunch of different games...but the ideal is not always practical.

Well, dammit rumble, I promised myself I wasn't going to try to pimp Dreamwalker here anymore (at least unless someone asked about it) but here I go---we designed the game for many of the reasons you stated above. We wanted one simple system, one set of characters to play each night and I, as a GM, wanted to be able to set adventures in different times, places, etc. because I constantly come up with a cool new western adventure, then a week later a post-apoc one, then a week later a sci-fi one, etc.

A "Sliders" type game deals with this subject material to some degree but the characters just seemed too limited skill wise---what good is Computer 4 in a fantasy world. A dream based game just seemed the most logical choice---with Dreamwalker you can have an ongoing campaign with the characters mucking about in the real world and you can jump settings as much as you want in the dream, completing the individual dream "goals" of each Dreamer in addition to combatting the spiritual menace of the Taenia.

Characters can adapt to the different settings by using their "spirit mana" to learn new skills, increase their physical attributes and reshaping parts of the dream, etc.---think of movies like The Matrix, Dark City and What Dreams May Come for the "feel" we were shooting for. Anyway check out the demo and our website for more info. Also a few reviews on RPGnet.

Oh and probably the best thing for you is that right now we don't have any supplements to buy---all you need is the core book. :)

Pete "Grand Master Pimp" Spahn

PS - I'd love to hear some feedback, either on the demo or from anyone who has actually bought the game. Also here to answer questions.

Hello,

Hi Rumble, and welcome to the Forge!

Here are a couple of thoughts that may or may not be useful.

Your priority to "keep up" with the hobby seems a little odd to me. I try to do that, but I have my own business-related reasons to do so. Here's my question for you: what experience in actual play have you had, just one is fine, in which you had an unqualified excellent time? Let me know what game it was, what aspects of play itself (not social-only things) seemed especially successful, and anything else about it.

Paul Czege and I spend a lot of time talking about people's relationship to the hobby of role-playing in terms of a dysfunctional romantic relationship, and the success of a recent RPG.net thread in this regard seems to bear out many of our long-standing points in private conversation.

1 - People continually repeat the same behavior (how they set up for and conduct play), with similar results each time (the game fizzles) and with great hopes that "this time" the game they choose will be different and hence their behavior will be successful after all.

2 - Consumerism, specifically buying a whole line of supplements, seems to be a compensation for disappointment - "If I only spend more money on 'this girl,' then she won't dump me like the last one did." (In which 'dumping' means a failed game, with the GM sitting there feeling messed over and wondering why.)

3 - Games get rejected out-of-hand due to lack of similarity to a long-standing set of criteria, even though those criteria, in practice, fail to yield much if any satisfaction. "She's a dog! Look at how she doesn't even have a skill list."

Any thoughts on those matters?

Best,
Ron

Rumble,

What Ron said. And some other stuff.

I've noticed that I've kinda beeen going the same way you have and not just with RPGs either. Its not pleasant. I mean I used to love Star Wars but now I don't. I haven't even seen the last one and can live the rest of my life just fine if I never do.

You're thinking back on your college days and I would suggest you quit doing that. You may remember having more fun back then, but you're not the same person you were back then. If you were to remember with perfect clarity, you'd remember the games you were running were just as hollow as the stuff you're running now. You just didn't know it then. Like how when I was seven I didn't notice how corny Herbie Goes Bananas was.

So what you need to do is figure out what you want in a game and then do that. And pay special attention to Ron's point #3. Do you want a detail position-based combat system because you really like it and it supports the kind of play you're looking for or do you just thing an RPG *must* have a detailed combat system.

Hello,

I've had similar thoughts -- hell, I've had the exact same thoughts -- regarding sticking with one game. I'm not a completist, nor am I drawn to the next Big Thing, but I can absolutely relate with the desire to focus. When I look at my shelf of games, most of which I've never played, I've asked myself, "Why buy/download/acquire anything else? I've got enough here to keep me busy the rest of my life."

When I catch myself thinking that way, my subsequent mental exercise is twofold: (1) Well, if I had to pick five games, just five, to play and stick with, what would they be? and (2) How much money am I spending on crack?

The way I figure it, the first gets me to consider my RP priorities and preference, what I'm looking for in games, what I would like to get out of them, and such. I don't get a static answer, as from time to time my top five games change, which tells me that having the entire shelf-cracking lot isn't really detracting from my roleplaying. Sometimes I'm cool with just rereading the books I'm not using.

The second question puts things in perspective in a different way. I'm not smoking my money away, and in the scheme of things, roleplaying offers a cheap hobby with an excellent per hour entertainment cost even for games I don't play. The only real constraint is shelf space.

I've grown much more relaxed about my gaming since I touched my tongue to the ice-cold Forge. More excited, wanting to try new stuff, apply new techniques, venture out on a limb or six, but the Forge has also given me the lens to assess my gaming motivations to the point where I'm completely comfortable with my tastes and a few dozen game books sporting wildly different content.

My suggestion, if I may be so brazen as to offer one, is for you to ask yourself what the three things are that you most enjoy about gaming. Then the three things you least enjoy. See if that maps any useful data for you.

Best,

Blake

[Edited to insert "ask" where needed. So I can sleep.]

rumble wrote: This exact message is posted at rpg.net. A kind user suggested I post it here for additional comments/suggestions.
++++++

Going Native

Assume you're in my situation:

You love RPGs.

. You've got to pick one and stick with it. You can play anything you want, but when you run, and you run deep, you run a single game.

Is this the solution?

- If so, are you obliged to pick a mainstream game so that you'll have players, shrugging off so much else that appeals to you?

- If so, do you hybridize or run a given game pure as published? I mean, I've rewritten Kult to use the fantastic Blue Planet rules, but never actually run it. What a waste of energy.

- If so, do you suffer without players until you find those actually interested in playing that game?
- If so, how do you keep from picking up the "next best thing"? Yes, willpower, of course, but is it worth the strain? You want to support the industry, but then again, you need to retain your sanity, and make sure that the money you spend actually gets used. ======
Has anyone "Gone Native" to alleviate the stress of being unable to keep up with progress in the industry? I'm right on the verge, I tells ya. It's not that I want to give up gaming, or sell all my unused stuff. It's just that I want to exert some control over my crazed consumerism that prevents me from actually enjoying the things that I purchase. I can do it -- I just have to make a decision about it.

I can only do so much in a day. I love my boardgames, my card games, my TiVo, my RPGs. Oh, yeah, and my wife. On top of all that, I've got a bit of completist in me, so if I buy into something small, I have to get EVERYTHING for it. And jeez, but it'd be nice to feel like I can buy a pair of pants without thinking that that money could buy me the next best game.

Sigh. What would you do if you had this problem? Therapy isn't the answer -- it just costs gaming money. It's all about willpower, and I've got plenty of that, as soon as I make a decision.

And you all get to be a part of it... Wheee! Am I even making sense or have I gone over the edge?

As a postscript, I know you aren't me, but that's the whole point of roleplaying, ain't it?

Been there (and probably am there now). What about the other people you play with? I have usually found in the few game groups I have been in there are a few "core" people and a lot of people who come and go -- show up for a while and then drop out for good. The core people tend to be people I feel like are more like friends I play games with rather than people filling in spaces areound the game table... do your "core" people prefer one game over another?

Well, with a few tweaks in the details, I too have "been there". Here's MY bottom line:

Really figure out just what it is that is most important/interesting/fun to me about gaming.
--Hanging out with friends? Which ones? Are there people who I simply tolerate because they game? Would I do the same in other areas of my life?
--Having a creative outlet? Of what kind? How much time am I willing to spend on it? How will I "enforce" that decision?
--What parts of gaming do I find the most fun? How can I have more of that? What at least fun? How can I reduce/eliminate that?

I look at those questions and (try to) make sure that all my decisions (time investment, money spent, which games to play, who to play them with, in what style, and etc.) are in line with my anwers.

For me - I'd never give up buying games that I find interesting, even if I never get to play them. But if I really like 'em, I should work on finding ways to play 'em.

I also wouldn't focus on just one game/system. Even "roleplaying" your bad memory and etc. issues, I'd just avoid the really complicated game systems and try a variety of the simpler ones. I might decide to look at playing and/or learning primarily one game for a while - I did this with DD3e a while back, as a good subset of my gaming friends got together and decided "OK, let's give this a try for a while." Now, I'm a voracious and fairly quick reader, so I kept up with a bunch of other games, and even played 'em more than I thought I would, but . . . that's one response to your dilemna. Focus for a time period, not for eternity.

Hope there's something interesting in there,

Gordon

I once used to pick up any gaming product that caught my eye. I'd feel bad when I went to a Gen Con and couldn't find something new and 'indie.' Times change (and two kids later) and I simply can't afford what I used to.

The worst part was that I couldn't commit to any of what I bought; two or three games in (if that) and I'd get bored. Couldn't seem to stop it; you know how analytical I am....

What was the solution to both problems? I started my own role-playing game product line.

(Not that that offers much help for your problem.)

Fang Langford

Whew, that’s quite a few comments to process. Here’s my response to each, as best as I can manage:

Chris: Thanks for the suggestion – it’s exactly what I’m trying to do. I know some people can’t eat, which makes me all the more irritated when I walk away at the end of the month and I’ve spent overspent my game budget AGAIN for no good reason. I’m trying to become more responsible. Part of the problem is that I have enough money to buy games OR pants. J Since all my basic needs are covered, guess which takes priority?

Valamir: Part of the difficulty for me in mastering a multitude of games is that I think my brain’s going early. It doesn’t seem like I can hold detailed rules information in my head, which slows down gameplay quite a bit. On the other hand, I think a ruleset that’s too simplistic, um, “cheats” players into just having a conversation around a table. That’s probably not the best terminology – to put it another way, it withholds too much of the “game” from RPGs when the rules get too simple. There’s a fine line in there somewhere. Over the Edge is just this side of too simplistic for me, but I still love the system. Incidentally, my Blue Planet + Kult was taking the great system rules for BP and the setting from Kult. I had to re-sort skills, redo the character sheet, and invent new Balance rules.

Demonspahn: You psycho – spending more money on games isn’t going to solve my problem :) But I did look at your game some time ago. I looked at it again, and opted not to purchase it because I recently discovered that one of my main stumbling blocks to playing new games was setting jargon. The more new vocabulary I’m required to learn, the less motivation I have to read and process the game, which in turn means that I’m less likely to play it. The only jargon-heavy game I’m willing to invest in these days (so far, anyway) is Agone. I’ve sworn off all others. No Maniacal Dream, no Chicken of the Sun (my CotS is for sale/trade, by the way). Of course, I pretty much have a subscription to anything Dying Earth, which is a different kind of vocabulary nightmare.

Ron: My best moments in gaming are when I get totally lost/fully invested in a character. I have a number of bright experiences (all involving baser emotions, I admit) in which I have personally been lost because my characters underwent such a severe trial or took such drastic action so naturally that I walked around in a daze simply reflecting on the situations.
Cases in point… My character kills another injured, hospitalized, potentially friendly character (PC!) *on video* to defend his actions to the higher-ups. I think the next time the GM spoke to me, it took three tries to get me out of my daze at what I’d done, from both a character and a player perspective. A second case would be when my character started getting frustrated with the (seemingly) inane logic of another PC and started yelling at the PC to emphasize his point. When I finished my tirade, I realized I was in fact yelling, and frustrated…and we were all in a coffee shop, in real life, with people looking at me a little oddly. I did look around sheepishly and apologize. :) There are others.
As far as the girlfriend-paralleling points regarding repeat behaviors, consumerism, and criteria-based rejection… I’m a pragmatist and a cynic. My purchasing decisions reflect these attitudes.
1) Repeat behavior: I have no illusions that my next game purchase will be the “greatest EVAR.” I purchase most games because there is a specific aspect of them that I like. When I purchased Blue Planet, I purchased many of the supplements. When I realized I liked the revised system better than the setting, I got rid of all my books except for the Player’s Guide. I bought SAS because I wanted the Tri-Stat system in a do-everything format, which BESM (to my mind) was not. I got the HERO system because, well, it seems like an industry foundation. I’ve bought into Agone because I loved the underlying nature of magic, not because I thought the system was any good. I bought Ars Magica because my group was playing it. Ad nauseam for everything else I have….
2) Consumerism: I’m a research hound. Even if I can’t read it all, I want it for reference. At the very least, I skim it all. I don’t necessarily read all the characters’ stats, but I get the gist of all the adventures. Sometimes I just want specific items, such as when I purchased Aberrant, and decided I wanted the additional rules and powers from Teragen and the Player’s Guide – and I’ve never played the game! Other times, I need everything, such as when I purchased EVERYTHING for Ravenloft. Also, when I get bored, I surf; when I surf, I find stuff I might want; when I’m really bored, I get the spendies and want to buy them. Jeez, I should spend more four-hour time blocks writing messages – it keeps me from surfing. :)
3) Criteria-based rejection: I get rid of games when I feel hopeless about them – “I’m never going to play this (again), and there’s nothing truly captivating about the subject matter anymore” or, “That gameplay was SO dissatisfying I never want to play that again.” The latter was what happened with Ars Magica, the former was what happened with Shadowrun. I refuse to buy games/supplements when they feel “generic,” or when I know I’ll never get around to them in the first place. When I first started running d20, I bought canned adventures just to speed the GM-ing process. When I realized I was spending more than I wanted to, I dropped them out entirely – I could come up with plots that were just as good or better, and after four canned adventures, my players all had characters with personality and goals – they didn’t need artificial adventures any more. I refused to buy Arrowflight and Godlike at >50% discounts because I knew I’d never get around to playing “just another fantasy game with different rules” or a “war-set game.”

Jack: I know I’m not the same person I was when I was in college, but my core beliefs and interests haven’t changed that much. I was more of a player than a GM back then, but still as, um, “grabby” about buying stuff. As I mentioned earlier, one reason I buy multiple games is that individual systems don’t support what I want. And of course, by the time I deal with all my other hobbies and responsibilities, I don’t feel like I have the time to hybridize material from separate games.
Since you focused on combat, I’d like to see an RPG that focuses just as much attention on combat as it does on every other aspect of the game. In other words, I don’t want to see a chapter simply devoted to combat, as I do in so many books. I want the chapter to be called Conflict, and cover all types of interpersonal conflict (not just physical) with the same level of detail. I know this wasn’t the intent of your statement, but *shrug*. :) Perhaps combat could be position-based and detailed, but then so should the system for social interactions. Rules for authority/status and power, emotional aggression, and so forth wouldn’t be out of place in a game than handled complexity of social interaction as well as it did combat.
As an afterthought, I don’t really want a game that complex. I just want one that’s balanced. I don’t feel that I should have to add a physical confrontation to a game to make it exciting. This is, unfortunately, the current situation.

Blake: Choosing five systems (and there was just a survey on this at RPG.net) would be tough for me because as I stated earlier, I purchase games because they have a particular trait that appeals, not because I think the game in its entirety is faboo. Many people participating in that thread thought five systems allowed too much leeway. Bottom line is, I get kinda lost after saying _Over the Edge_ for number one. Either Dying Earth or Agone would be in there, Feng Shui/Nexus or Adventure! might be in there, Kult and/or Cthulhu might be in there, and Top Secret/S.I., Control, Nobilis, or Theatrix could be contenders. It’s really tough for me to choose -- especially when I haven’t even played the last four games, and haven’t actually read a few of them all the way through.
As far as the three things I game for the most, those would probably be 1) the simple fact that I’m having fun playing a game – escaping/doing something of no real consequence, 2) socializing with people as or more imaginative than myself, and 3) the collaborative storybuilding aspect.
Three things I like the least: 1) rules that slow down play, 2) overly-jargonized setting information, 3) players/GMs who aren’t good sports. Dunno how that helps me, but I did the work of figuring it out ;).

Ace: I couldn’t resist buying Aberrant and Trinity after purchasing Adventure!, but I did buy them secondhand, and therefore more cheaply. :) Suggestion #5 (Forget Progress) was a tad clique-serving, but I forgive you :). The gist was well taken, but it will be difficult to implement. #6 (Never sell Irreplaceables) I’ve gone through, having had to pick up some of my GW Judge Dredd stuff up again, as well as Paranoia. Also regret getting rid of Star Frontiers stuff and MSH stuff – I used to have both Zebulon’s Guide and the Ultimate Powers Book. C’est la vie. I REALLY liked suggestions #8 (Buy real books) and #9 (Use game money for support stuff). I used to read much more real/non-gaming materials, and that has suffered greatly of late. Also, I think if I’d feel better about some purchases if I used some of my gaming budget to buy support materials that could be used outside of gaming (e.g., CDs).

gleepw: I’m in one weekly group, another that’s going to be weekly or biweekly (haven’t decided yet), and another that’s a “whenever” group (right now, about once every 4-6 weeks). In all cases, groups sizes are kept down to 5 people or less. We simply don’t invite additional regulars to the group when it hits 5 people.

Gordon: Focusing is easy for me. That’s where my voracious research-and-purchase bent kicks in. It’s a fatal focus on acquisition rather than implementation. Once I start implementing, it’s easier for me to get distracted by the “shiny new thing” rather than focus on what I’m supposed to be doing.

I just discovered something new yesterday. For the first time in a long time, I sat down and started creating character sheets for NPCs. Usually I just run stuff off the cuff, with broad generalizations and sketchy, build-as-I-go-along information in my head. I’ve run four-hour adventures based on a six-word guide written on a piece of scratch paper the size of a post-it note! When my group throws together characters for a game, I just grab some numbers and go, tossing on a personality like an old coat that’s taken for granted. I’d forgotten how satisfying it was to really take the time to build a personality, to justify its existence, to try and counter/balance the needs of the character with its allies, enemies, and environment.