Hi, I'm Jesse, the only one of pyron/eric's gaming group, as he is more or less the main GM. I would like to mention that we really aren't a defective group, as much as we argue (and this is nothing compared to lunch at school) we aren't that bad. =-) I feel inclined to state my opinion on the somewhat recent argument/discussion, but I will try to be brief and not bug anybody too much.

Cody's MW campaign was, as many people said, a lighter mood than eric's more deep ones, which were, as mentioned earlier, somewhat linear and confusing for the players. They are fun, but we are too incompatible of a group to go too far seriously. Somebody goofs around sooner or later and, well, there it goes. Some people would say, "incompatible group, why not find other people?" The simple fact is that there are no other people. You say "OF COURSE THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE IN A WHOLE CITY!" but, none that play RPGs in any way similar to us. And from what has been seen here already, we don't need any more differing oppinions, we have plenty. I will give eric this, his campaigns are great, but not well incorperated with the players, which of course, messes up the point while appearing to be fine. This is the cause of much trouble. He does ask about how he did after most sessions, but I would think that he doesn't apply it well enough, as all our campaigns suffer the same fate... ultimately being disbanded for lack of character/player intrest. We start and end too quick.
Now, it's true that I'm doing an aweful lot of 'complaining' and little proposition of solutions. But the fact of the matter is, I'm a player, not a GM ofany tipe. I tried once. It went two sessions and died a painful death; GMing is not my thing, I'd rather play anyway (mroe fun!). So, now that I'm finished with that unimportant tangent... I think that our biggest problem (centered around the games and having fun of course) is that we need to have anyone who is GMing actively to work together to avoid fights between various GMs and to make whatever we do more, what shall we say, captivating? Suggestions anyone?

Hi Jesse, and welcome! So the whole pack's here, eh?

I have a couple of suggestions.

1) Whoever happens to be GMing at a particular game/session, everyone else make a personal commitment not to be the (or "a") GM during that time. In other words, get that GM-vs.-GM rivalry out of the picture. When one person is GMing, it's not a direct challenge to another person who happens to GM at another time.

That's pretty hard, by the way. I was terrible about that in college; I was GMing most of the time and other people would get excited about running something ... and I'd be that kind of bully-player who insisted on making GM-level decisions, interpreting dice rolls, etc, basically taking over.

Now, we have some games that permit lots more power-sharing, but back then, it wasn't power-sharing I was after, it was power-mongering. And I'm not talking about character power, I'm talking about social, "I'm the GM" power.

2) Patience. Patience. That means that if a single session isn't perfect or stellar, don't get all fired up about how "bad" this game is, or what this GM "did wrong." Talk about anything, maybe, but without pressure. Just let another session come along, and another ... it doesn't suck unless the trend sucks, you see. If the trend is no fun, then that's that - time to have a real discussion about it. If the one session was just a blip, or if the GM (or a player) is definitely changing certain behaviors, then stay with it. Support one another's efforts, which means looking for them and giving good feedback.

You guys are friends, right? Really be friends. That doesn't only mean you can call one another names and get away with it (which is a fun part of being friends sometimes), it means that you allow each other room to improve at things.

Best,
Ron