No, not one of those dumb quizzes (although I am MUCH bigger than a breadbox). I have a problem fitting in to my gaming group, and, being too mean to pay a professional, I wanted some free advice on exactly what's going on in my head. I'm not sure this is the right place to ask, but the terminology came from here, so...

Here's the situation. Our gaming club has in it three groups. All are, generally speaking, Simulationist, as far as you can generalise such a thing. The GM creates a world (or, more realistically, picks up a book and uses a world someone else has created), creates a story, creates scenes within the story. The players create characters, then describe the character's actions and roll the dice. the GM may fudge a few (or a lot) of the rolls to heighten the game, but the stress is certainly on Exploration, Setting and System (in varying orders of importance), and rarely on Character. I haven't seen a clear situation of Narrativism in 20-odd years.

And that's the problem. In 20-odd years I've been a Simulationist. RuneQuest, traveller, GURPS, the lot. And I'm bored with it. game tables depress me. I write up my own fiction about my characters. I devise all sorts of motivations, moral dillemas, plot hooks. But when I try to play Narrativist, I hit a brick wall (players don't respond, GMs don't have a rule for it). When I try to GM Narrativist I get blank stares. Mind you, I've not entirely escaped the Sim mindset, I LIKE realism, and I detest a system that fails a 'reality test'. I just don't want to have to look it up in a table all the time...

But... our group is possibly the oldest, both in terms of establishment (some of us started in 1979) and in player age (I'm **hrumphle*** years old myself...). And we're showing clear signs of game fatigue. Slow play, frequent out-of-game distractions, minimal progress, no excitement. The most animated we've become recently is when playing filler games of ZOMBIES!!! Hero Wars drifted off, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer is lethargic and mechanical (and no, I don't mean the Buffybot). I believe the others need a bit of a shove and encouragement. Hell, they turn up every week, they must want something. Maybe we have a complete group of Casual Gamers? They're my friends, and I'm not walking out on them.

I've tried playing with the other, newer, younger (damn them...) groups, and they're faster, more focussed, more involved... and Powergamers and kill-crazies and rules lawyers. No burnout there, but not my cup of tea.

Now, clearly, that's not enough to go on, but, generally speaking,

HELP ME!

Wulf

My own gaming goes in cycles Wulf. I hit the point where you are now about 10 years ago and for most of the last 10 years had pretty much withdrawn from Roleplaying (except for a couple dabbles which confirmed why I didn't do it much any more).

Instead my attention shifted to board games. Avalon Hill classics like Civilization or Brittania or History of the World which I had always enjoyed were now the main focus of my, and my gaming groups, time. From there the flood of European-style games really brought excitement back into my gaming. It got me past the burn out. I had continued to stay "in" the RPG world as a buyer of games (looking for something that might get me excited) but rarely played. Then I stumbled on 7th Sea, joined the 7th Sea mailing list, witnessed the departure of JW and followed the development of Orkworld. Orkworld led me to Gaming Outpost where I discovered a whole bunch of roleplayers talking about roleplaying...and actually sounding like they were having fun. I eventually migrated most of my time over here to the Forge and for the last couple years have been enjoying roleplaying again (taking time out to crush Seth and his wife beneath the heals of my Samurai in Tenjo, of course).

So, shareing moment aside. You may just need a breather. Try spending a few weeks or months (hopefully you won't need years like I did) playing other types of games for a while.

Hmm... interesting. The other potential Narrativist in the group (with two of us, there was someone to play against at least) just left due to family commitments (two young kids). Now we're boardgaming on irregular nights...Settlers of Catan card game last week, Nomad Gods tomorrow.

But the problem is I don't feel burnt out or lacking motivation, I feel more excited and ready to game than I have the last 10 years or so. There are so many games I want to play. I just have to figure out how to motivate the group (which, I agree, may mean a break or change in gaming). Specifically, I want them motivated for HeroQuest in March...

Wulf

Wulf wrote: Specifically, I want them motivated for HeroQuest in March...

Wulf,

My best recommendation is to run a game of InSpectres. The rules can be taught quickly, and everyone knows and likes the genre. Present it as a light diversion. After a successful run you'll have taken the edge off the blank stares.

One thing you should know though. Narrativism doesn't mean sacrificing realism. Aggressively Sim games try to capture realism mechanically, via system. But invariably, cracks emerge. Narrativism has appeal to a lot of Sim gamers, I think, because they recognize that the human brain is intuitively a much more reliable engine of probability and realism than they've ever experienced from system mechanics.

Paul

greyorm wrote:

Wulf wrote: Specifically, I want them motivated for HeroQuest in March...

Have you talked to them about this?

That is, physically stood up and said, "Hey everyone, in March we're going to play Hero Wars. I'm really excited about playing it, but I want you to be, too, or I don't see a reason to play. So what excites you about Hero Wars?"

Here's the other thing, if you really want to play all these games, do the "X-games" thing: one new game every month or two.

Wulf wrote: I don't think they actually KNOW how to play Narratively, or any other way but Simulationist, they never have. It interests them, but it's too much work, or too different, or just plain scarey. They'll play Hero Wars/HeroQuest, but they'll play it Simulationist.

Good point, John. Wulf, have you considered looking for another group, one that matches your priorities better?

Mike

John Kim wrote: On the other hand, it may be that they really like Simulationist play. It certainly sounds like you have made reasonable attempts at introducing Narrativist play and it hasn't seriously interested them. It seems to me quite possible that you could keep trying one Narrativist game after another at them and keep getting the same results.

In this case, if you want to keep gaming with them you need to find a compromise or (ideally) hybrid which excites both you and them. I would look at what does interest them -- especially in terms of source material. Are they into superheroes, or espionage, or Star Wars, or what? Then look for what inside of that would interest you.

Wulf wrote: I'd be perfectly willing to agree that they prefer Simulationist play, but at the moment, they haven't got too wonderfully excited about that either. The Narrativist concepts I've discussed have interested them, they've SAID they'd like to try.

John Kim wrote: Fair enough. Has there been anything in play, however small, that has gotten them excited? i.e. a particular fight went better than usual, or a certain NPC was popular, etc. If possible, it is better to look at things which were actually liked in play, rather than things which sound like they might be good.

Wulf wrote: Certainly the most fluid 'campaign' we have played through (actually a part of the ongoing Hero Wars campaign) was my adaptation of Mononoke Hime (Princess Mononoke), 'tweaked' to fit into Glorantha.
...
Anyway, what I would say is that (being uncharitable), if you spoon-feed them plot, they will lap it up. So, the job is, to provide loads of detail, and present it fluidly and in depth... no problem...

John Kim wrote: OK, here's where the clash of styles comes in. Offhand, it sounds like the players had a fair bit of fun with this, while you as GM did not. i.e. You felt like it was a lot of work to provide all the detail and "spoon-feed" them the plot, with not much of what you would consider payoff. Does that sound right?

What I would do would be to look at what -- within the things they like -- are there things which you like as well. Were there times of payoff for you in the Mononoke sub-campaign? On the other hand, what were the parts you liked the least?

You're also welcome to come play some sessions with the indie-netgaming group at Yahoo.

We set up games over the internet. Playing via IRC and E-mail.
We seem to have quite a few GMs playing so we lean a bit toward the Narrativist-side (or at least Directors stance).

We have an ongoing Universalis game, and are just setting up for a game of Cornerstone,which looks to be playable as "as much or little Director stance as you want" Sim?

It could give you an outlet for play (you may even find you don't like Nar in Play that much after all...or that you like it a Lot!... or you may just like mixing up the Stances of Sim)

Wulf wrote: I may try Donjon. It's got simulationist mechanics, if you ignore the 'extras'.

greyorm wrote: Might I suggest you're not really grasping GNS, and this is affecting your attempts to try things out based on that comprehension?

I'm saying this because of the context of a few terms you've tossed around -- what cinched it is that Donjon is a blatantly Gamist game, and mechanics, while they can influence or support a particular style, are not G,N or S.

You've stated that you've unsuccessfully tried a couple things to get others in your group to play or approach certain games. In all cases, you report a a lack of response and disinterest.

Let's figure out why that is specifically without using the theory shorthand -- meaning you'll need to do a lot of examination on your own and bring up these problems with your group as individuals directly -- again, without using the theory terminology.

Hello, I'm new here but I'm going to throw in my 2 cents based on my 2 1/2 decades of gaming.

Wulf, I think the first thing you need to do is print out your last post and read it, aloud, to your player group. I would like to hear your players' responses, because I'm betting that they would either:
1 - Disagree with you, because they feel that their interests are not being catered to. In other words, there has been a miscommunication on exactly what style of game they would like to have...and unless your players also read this site and are all familiar with the GNS terminology, they are going to misunderstand what you are talking about.

2 - Agree that they are lethargic about the gaming, because they indeed show up every week expressly for socializing, and the gaming is just an excuse or added bonus. They will probably ask why you are taking all this so seriously.

Beyond getting your players' responses in this discussion, my advice to you is to check out some other groups, and bring up this subject with them, in the context of their games.

Have you considered running something (such as Donjon you mentioned) for more than one group of people? I have found that GMing the same scenario for two groups of players who don't know each other can be revealing of one's gaming style.

One more thing...I regularly game with some people who are little more than half my age so I can relate to your feelings of "gamer generation gap". I have made a special effort to fit in with the younger players' mindsets in relation to the gaming. I actually find younger players to be somewhat blundering and slow...especially when dealing with certain subjects...but the payoff of gaming with different people is well worth the time.

-TJ

Wulf wrote: Re: sub-campaign based on Princess Mononoke
I had a whale of a time, it was smooth, fluid and focused. But to do it again (and again and again) with original plots would be a challenge (hell, if I could pull it off, I'd be damn proud).
...
Well, what I like, and what I'd like more of, is character interraction (PC and NPC). Which would mean providing those situations where people are more significant than skills or setting, I guess. I'd like there to be more player-led plot, mind you, but so far that's not forthcoming. I can truly say there was nothing that did NOT work in that campaign (other than a couple of bits where I was losing track of how PC actions could be brought back to the plot). So maybe the predictability of the plot (I'd seen the movie, I knew how it ended) was too great for me.

I think my group has some similarities. While they are pretty good about individual interactions, the overall plot direction seems to come from me as GM. I think it is partly a question of group dynamic: the PCs are all closely related, but they aren't an organized group with a leader or a single direction.

the old truism is "There is no such thing as an original plot." I would say don't be afraid to steal mercilessly. But also, don't be afraid to mangle and change and distort to suit.

clehrich wrote:

John Kim wrote: I think my group has some similarities. While they are pretty good about individual interactions, the overall plot direction seems to come from me as GM. I think it is partly a question of group dynamic: the PCs are all closely related, but they aren't an organized group with a leader or a single direction.

I think you might try to think about ways to reward PC interactions with plot things. The classic example would be the old PC's getting together to work out a plan of action. Since you're in the room while they do this, you can try to encourage this to be done in-character, and then reward them for doing so by having their plan work pretty well. You can also toss challenges and difficulties at them based upon character difficulties rather than setting/mechanics ones.

Hello,

Guys, I'm not sure that this discussion is about GNS any more, if it ever was. Wulf, do you think you could review this thread in GNS-terms, and see whether that's still the issue? If so, we can continue it here. If not, then maybe a new thread in Actual Play is the right way to go.

The whole group-planning, together-vs.-separate characters issue, for instance, is a real drift from the topic, and it definitely needs its own thread (which will garner multiple links to already-existing threads, by the way).

Best,
Ron

John Kim wrote:

Wulf wrote: Re: sub-campaign based on Princess Mononoke
I had a whale of a time, it was smooth, fluid and focused. But to do it again (and again and again) with original plots would be a challenge (hell, if I could pull it off, I'd be damn proud).

Had any of the players also seen Princess Mononoke, or were you the only one who knew it? Were the PCs playing roles corresponding to characters in the movie, or were they all additional figures? Was there character interaction which you liked?

However, tentatively, I'd like to offer a bit of advice. I would try for a campaign where the PCs have a built-in driving plot goal that give a concrete direction for their plans.

I think my group has some similarities. While they are pretty good about individual interactions, the overall plot direction seems to come from me as GM. I think it is partly a question of group dynamic: the PCs are all closely related, but they aren't an organized group with a leader or a single direction.

Agreed, Ron, the conversation didn't go the way I had planned, although I acknowledge my plans were flawed, and the results were most edificatious :-)

Thanks all. Thread closed, I think.

Wulf