Danger

[InzeladunMaster]

I made adventures based on input of ALL the players. I had several complaints that we were doing too much based on the chaos cities, and asked that I changed the focus for a short time. I added elements to Oard based on player requests. Every invasion was based on a player request. Several of them were tired of going after lions and owls. I received more disparate requests for that campaign than any other I have ever run. Everyone had a different idea for its direction. I erred by trying to please too many people. I tried. I failed. I am going to keep trying.

Thank you for your thoughtful observations on my failures. I get defensive because I have no idea how to respond to constant, non-stop criticism, especially when a lot of your complaints stem from me using ideas from other players given to me behind the scenes. Should I give one player's ideas more emphasis than anothers? My idea (which did not work) was to combine everyone's ideas and see what grows. I get defensive because, by quitting yet continuing to barrage me with complaints, you rob me of the power to change a past failure into a success - a chance to learn from mistakes and make an improvement for you. I get defensive because I am tired of being demonized for allowing the other players to have input and because I utilized their input. If you are going to quit, then quit. If you simply want to improve the game, then criticise and stay in it. I can't change the past, but I can improve the future. Doing both (quitting and continuing to complain) does nothing positive for anyone.

I'd be happy to discuss it in person if you intend to return to the game. Otherwise, there is no point in hearing your "thoughtful" complaints. You are always welcome at my house and at my games and should consider yourself invited to each and every one as I continue my journey in learning to be a better gamesmaster. I will fail once in a while, but hopefully a few successes will be enjoyed by all.

 

[InzeladunMaster]

Yeah, but would a player care more about danger that happens in their home than danger that happens halfway across the world? Would players be more likely to have an emotional investment locally or far away? Which has more dramatic tension, a foolproof, impregnable fortress or a tenous situation that needs constant tending? I can think of lots of dramatic reasons to bring the tension home. A good GM should always be looking for the plot that tugs the hardest on the player's heartstrings.

Obviously, I don't know this particular situation you are referring to. But with 20+ years of experience playing/GMing, I can guess this this is a situation where your trust with the GM is lost, i.e. It doesn't sound like you have faith in your GM to tell a compelling, interesting, survivable story anymore.

I agree with you on both points. The first is a fantastic point, and the second is a sad truth.

 

[InzeladunMaster]

Ya, and players have to have a fundamental faith in the DM/GM/referee and his storytelling abilities, i.e. the ability to create that dramatic tension and to allow for an avenue of escape or victory. Bringing in a monster or trap that CAN kill a PC is easy, bringing in one that CAN'T kill them is also easy. Bringing in something that will give them a good battle or good puzzle and ALMOST kill them is difficult.

That is an excellent post. Hopefully I can manage to achieve the latter more often than not. I wish I could promise perfection, but I will misjudge things now and again.

 

[Mark van Dyk]

I only wrote...

I only wrote what I did because it seemed that you were still attempting to defend certain aspects of the game. I did not know that so many people were unhappy with the way things were and that so many people wanted to do other things. I asked many times if people wanted to go on other errands, but never did they say in the game. They preferred to say it when I wasn't around! This kind of behind my back nonsense went on all the time, as if everyone was afraid of me. The whole secrecy about playing at Chris's comes to mind. If it is anyone's failure in this regard, it is players who don't bring their own ideas forth and then follow through with them. If I am that over-bearing, then it is still best that I not play.

In truth, I am not berating you for failures. I am only saying what I didn't like, just as I would say what I did like. Yes, I have harped on it, but only because I still feel that no one understands where I am coming from, though some (I won't mention names) do.

Inzeladun is fine. You are a fine DM. I learned everything about DMing from you. But, there are aspects of playing right now that I am not sure will ever be remedied as far as my own personal desires are concerned. Therefore, I must run the game my way!

Anyway, I am sorry you feel so attacked. I wasn't really meaning it to get you so riled up. And honestly, though you say I am welcome to play, I cannot help feeling that this is not wholly true for you or others. If it was, then people would not be so squeamish about taking their own initiatives during game play.

Trying to please everyone is difficult. Yet working with a group who cannot communicate their own desires openly within the group and trying to please them all is worse. I feel for you. I had no idea that stuff was even going on. I feel that I failed as a leader, too, if I was not able to enable those within the group to achieve their own goals. It is the same old disease. Not to boo-hoo about things, but it is just like old times. No one likes playing with me! LOL Oh well. It's just as I've always said...

 

[thormagni]

MVD,

This is going to probably come across as a smartask comment, but have you ever considered just writing fiction? I mean, RPGs are at heart interactive, mutual storytelling. At its simplest level, the GM sets the world and the actions/personalities of the NPCs, then the players control their characters' interactions with that world, their actions in that world and their characters' personalities.

Now, there have been some recent advances where players gain some control over the details of the setting and plot through the use of fate points/action points/ dramatic editing (in say, Conan/Spycraft and D20 Modern/Adventure D20 respectively) But the old, accepted paradigm is that the players move through the plot and world of the GM.

If what you are really interested in is telling stories where you control both the flow of the plot, the setting and the characters, it doesn't sound like interactive, mutual storytelling anymore. It sounds more like traditional fiction.

A side note, I am reviewing the new Exalted Player's Guide from White Wolf, so I am reading up on the Exalted setting and rules. I was surprised to find that White Wolf doesn't even call it a RPG, instead referring to it as a "Storytelling game." I had to go back through the old Vampire book I have and was even more surprised to realize it was also a "Storytelling game." I guess it never really registered before.

The way I am thinking about it, now, though, is that I can create the world I imagine as a DM where I could not as a player. The world will still have its evil and awfulness, but I can see the good guys I envisioned as a player existing in my world as strong and plausible, and they can exist in my imagination without constant fear for their survival!

 

[Odovacar's Ghost]

Story Telling games....

I have a hands on experience with the story telling of White Wolf. I've played with most of their products. During a tabletop session it is played just like any other rpg. But, when you jump right into LARP, then you have the story telling aspect coming into play. You have your Story Teller (DM) and one or more Narrators. The story teller is the one who sets the overall story line. The Narrators are only needed when the player count gets over 10 or so. No one stays in one general area. The whole house is the playing ground. So, when there is a conflict or informational gathering the Narrator steps in to play, IF the ST is not there.

Both the Narrators and the ST play PCs and NPCs.

Average sized LARP (White Wolf) that I have played is around 30 people (ages 21-50). Hosted at my old apartment. I only played one LARP at a small con with 100 people.

Alas, I now no longer play LARP. I probably will never do it again. Tensions in a mere tabletop RPG doesn't even come close to LARP. I've seen real fights break out after mock combat. Some guy's 9th gen vampire gets killed by a hunter, vampire, or were-critter. Het gets upset for losing his character and well...out comes the physical blows.

I probably have as many sea stories as I do LARP stories.

 

[thormagni]

My experience with White Wolf stuff: I have only played two sessions of Vampire (not my cup o' tea), Trinity once and ran an Aberrant game for about a year. I thought Abby was a great system and setting and am pining for the D20 version this summer.

I never tried LARP, mainly 'cause I suspected I wasn't nearly cool enough (or thin enough) to carry off the emaciated, goth look (I realize that is probably just a stereotype, but that is my meager experience with Vampire players.) I did go through an all-black, skulls and silver phase when I got out of the Navy, but had pretty much moved on by the time my son was born. Now, I can't even wear my skull/ankh/Darwin fish earrings anymore (work won't allow it, and my pierced ear has closed up.)

I have a hands on experience with the story telling of White Wolf.

 

[Mark van Dyk]

Funny you should ask...

This is going to probably come across as a smartask comment, but have you ever considered just writing fiction?


Yes. I have written many short stories and one novel. I am currently editing the novel in hopes of publishing it. Though, the road is long and I see no homey publishing doorstep... I have written for newspapers on occasion and have several stories floating out there in hopeful publication land...