State of the Game
Jun. 10th, 2005 03:08 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jeregenestMore meanderings about my gamemastering
I’ve been thinking a lot about myself as a gamemaster. Because lets be frank, I’m not a good player nor do I get the opportunity to play in many games. This is, by the way, mostly my fault. Like I said I’m a bad player. I’ve got control issues, what can I say? And I might be a spotlight-hog.
But as I was saying, I’ve been doing a bit of introspection about my role as a gamemaster. In particular I’ve been thinking about interpretation of the world. I agree with the idea (not originated by me) that the gamemaster is really the most credible interpreter of what the fictional world we playing in is, that his interpretation of system, including what the rules used to define the fictional world are and what they mean when applied to play. Players have a degree of credibility too, and basically the idea is that the game environment is determined by the contributions of whoever has the Credibility to state it based on the authority of the rules/system/setting/game.
Now recently (last couple of year) I’ve been trying to give the players a larger measure of credibility, going beyond the typical being able to define at least what actions their characters will attempt. And there have been some successes and some failures. I like the results as it applies to world building and player investment, I don’t like the fact that I’ve found it really limits the types of stories can tell. And teres little surprise factor for the players. And I like surprising them.
So, with Tantaene Animis Caelestibus Irae my goal was to give the players a large degree of autonomy in building setting and in what their players have the power to do. But I’d retain a lot of the plotting/story progression power.
One of the tools I choose for getting player involvement in setting was lexicon, and to be frank I’m still not sure what the long-term impact of Lexicon of Untold Ages was, but it was fun enough, and valuable enough to me that I’m doing another.
My major worry about player involvement actually is reverse, I often wonder if HeroQuest, together with the setting, is giving the players too many options and maybe some of them are drowning as a result.
Maintaining the plotting power hasn’t been easy as I'd like. I’ve been accused, probably rightly so, of railroading. I think part of the problem here has been the structure of two sessions in each past life. So many things to do, so little time to do it in. Hopefully the modern day (with flashbacks) will prove easier.
Oh, and I’m still neutral to HeroQuest. The game has some great points, but its not the most intuitive, and I really don't like the damn charts necessary for contests. I thought, wrongly, that I would have gotten to the point where they are just intuitive, and they're not. Maybe I ened a cheat-sheet or a screen. Just joking about that last part.
So, to wrap up. I'm having a lot of fun with the game. I think my players are (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
peaseblossom's food could be the only reason people show up however). I have some worries about the players. And I think I can do better as a gamemaster. The system isn't the greatest thing ever, but its not the worse.
I’ve been thinking a lot about myself as a gamemaster. Because lets be frank, I’m not a good player nor do I get the opportunity to play in many games. This is, by the way, mostly my fault. Like I said I’m a bad player. I’ve got control issues, what can I say? And I might be a spotlight-hog.
But as I was saying, I’ve been doing a bit of introspection about my role as a gamemaster. In particular I’ve been thinking about interpretation of the world. I agree with the idea (not originated by me) that the gamemaster is really the most credible interpreter of what the fictional world we playing in is, that his interpretation of system, including what the rules used to define the fictional world are and what they mean when applied to play. Players have a degree of credibility too, and basically the idea is that the game environment is determined by the contributions of whoever has the Credibility to state it based on the authority of the rules/system/setting/game.
Now recently (last couple of year) I’ve been trying to give the players a larger measure of credibility, going beyond the typical being able to define at least what actions their characters will attempt. And there have been some successes and some failures. I like the results as it applies to world building and player investment, I don’t like the fact that I’ve found it really limits the types of stories can tell. And teres little surprise factor for the players. And I like surprising them.
So, with Tantaene Animis Caelestibus Irae my goal was to give the players a large degree of autonomy in building setting and in what their players have the power to do. But I’d retain a lot of the plotting/story progression power.
One of the tools I choose for getting player involvement in setting was lexicon, and to be frank I’m still not sure what the long-term impact of Lexicon of Untold Ages was, but it was fun enough, and valuable enough to me that I’m doing another.
My major worry about player involvement actually is reverse, I often wonder if HeroQuest, together with the setting, is giving the players too many options and maybe some of them are drowning as a result.
Maintaining the plotting power hasn’t been easy as I'd like. I’ve been accused, probably rightly so, of railroading. I think part of the problem here has been the structure of two sessions in each past life. So many things to do, so little time to do it in. Hopefully the modern day (with flashbacks) will prove easier.
Oh, and I’m still neutral to HeroQuest. The game has some great points, but its not the most intuitive, and I really don't like the damn charts necessary for contests. I thought, wrongly, that I would have gotten to the point where they are just intuitive, and they're not. Maybe I ened a cheat-sheet or a screen. Just joking about that last part.
So, to wrap up. I'm having a lot of fun with the game. I think my players are (
peaseblossom's food could be the only reason people show up however). I have some worries about the players. And I think I can do better as a gamemaster. The system isn't the greatest thing ever, but its not the worse.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
No solutions...
Date: 2005-06-10 07:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-11 03:51 am (UTC)In re railroading, yeah, much of it has been awfully railroady. NPCs giving orders and laying down rules. I realize though that that's part of the deal in terms of the incarnation sequences, though I think the end of the Chichen Itza went the way it did at least in part as a sort of reaction to the railroading, a desire to find some nonlinear way out of the maze. I'm expecting things to open up with time. If they don't I might get antsy.
Also, my choice of pumping all my points into CRYSTAL SKULL OF DOOM was due in part to a desire to simplify the magic system. Three kinds of magic that each have three levels of effect, plus a kitchenful of semimagical abilities like Sacred Geometry and the Pentecost Gift: it's a complex system. By staking out a region with broadly applicable but definitely limited areas -- there are a lot of things you just can't do with a Crystal Skull of Doom -- I feel I made my character distinct.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-11 03:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-13 04:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-13 04:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-13 04:44 pm (UTC)