The Tenets of GM Mastery

[riprock]

Riprock

me shares your pain.
free mmo's and paying mmo's are flooding the local market here in south east asia. I've lost a few good players ... okay more than a few and not all good to ... WoW and others over the last 5 years.

I like the sara teasdale quote in your sig.

I actually approve of WoW, in a way.

I loved 3.0. I loved the core rules. I hoped it would stay cool.

IMHO, it fell apart due to bloat. And 3.5 made it worse.

I think what's going to happen is that WoW is going to deliver all the thrills of 3.5 in an easier way than 3.5 can ever do. And someone smart -- like Monte Cook -- will learn from the mistakes and make a better game.

Actually, Cook and Mearls have already given the world Iron Heroes. Give them a few more years, while WoW eats into WotC's profits, and the pressure should produce some excellent leadership and creativity.

 

[Henry]

Here are my thoughts on the tenets listed:

Tenet #2
The individual campaign is an interpretative extension of the game it is based on, aimed at activity by a small group.

In recent years, the focus has fallen off of "the game" and more on "the campaign." With theh advent of Generic rules sets, e.g d20, Fudge, Fuzion, True 20, Grim Tales, etc. People will often take the toolkit they prefer to run the game they desire; they'll even switch out rules sets to play the same game if they feel that it's not doing what it should. So one D&D game these days will be RADICALLY different from another one, compared to 25 years ago.

Tenet #3
The creative interpretation of a campaign must remain within the scope and spirit of the game.

To a small degree, yes -- there aren't too many people using Shadowrun to play D&D-style dungeon crawls, for instance. (Except Clueless in one-shots. ) However, the "scope and spirit" of games are wider than they used to be. Originally, you'd play Boot Hill for your Westerns, Gamma World for your goofy sci-fi, Traveller for your "hard" sci-fi; now, you'd play modified d20 Modern, or Spycraft, or similar, for all of them.

Tenet #4
The campaign is constantly undergoing modification through game master and player interaction.

This is the way it should be, or a game gets stagnant and starts bleeding players. Keep it dynamic, and odds are that they'll get upset when a game meeting gets cancelled.

Tenet #5
The role of game master is that of an active neutral with duty first to the campaign, then the group, and then the game.

So in essence, Gary is agreeing with all of us here in that thread asking "Is the DM facilitiator or adversary?" by saying "adversarial facilitator." Gary's always been a proponent of "entertainment through challenge." It can be fun to bash orcs, but flexing your mental muscles can be fun, too, often after the fact, especially when you succeed after a few failures. There were people who played D&D back in those heady days, had a character die once, then quit, but how many of those players came right back for more? The challenge of keeping PCs alive bred dedicated hobbyists who kept the desire for the game alive in good times and bad alike; I wonder if the game would have fared as more than a footnote had it been a total lack of challenge?

Tenet #6
The game master serves best when he enables players to participate actively to their fullest.

No arguments here.

Tenet #7
Total mastery of a game system is desirable for game master and players alike.

And no arguments from me, also. The more players and GMs know about the games their playing, the smoother they run, plain and simple. I also encourage all the players in our groups to get at least one turn behind the GM screen, as well -- it teaches you so much about being a good gamer, and improves your skill at both playing and GM'ing.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I loved 3.0. I loved the core rules. I hoped it would stay cool.

IMHO, it fell apart due to bloat. And 3.5 made it worse.

Nothing obligates you to use anything other than the core rules.

 

[erc1971]

IMO tenant #1 is the only rule required for RPG's.

Everyone should have fun - if that goal is acheived, you are playing the game properly.

Your group likes to do a bunch of 1 shots - nothing wrong with that if everyone likes it.

You want to give Kobold's Uzi's and mirror shades !! - if that is your thing, and everyone is having fun, go for it!

You like to spend your sessions hacking and slashing through everything that moves - go for it.

And, if you like 5 year long campaigns with lots of role playing, character development and deep immersion - yeah, that's OK too

 

[Gold Roger]

I'll disagree with this order. The first is to the group (because without a group, you have no game or campaign). The second is to the campaign (because without a group and a campaign, you have no game), and the third is to the game (because the game is only one consideration in how to express the campaign or have fun as a group).

Thanks for saying what was on my mind. The other way around promotes the "my campaign" feeling that's still with many DMs in one way or another. It's the whole group that composes the campaign, so how could the campaign be of higher priority?

 

[Aikuchi]

I like the sara teasdale quote in your sig.

I actually approve of WoW, in a way.

I loved 3.0. I loved the core rules. I hoped it would stay cool.

IMHO, it fell apart due to bloat. And 3.5 made it worse.

I think what's going to happen is that WoW is going to deliver all the thrills of 3.5 in an easier way than 3.5 can ever do. And someone smart -- like Monte Cook -- will learn from the mistakes and make a better game.

Actually, Cook and Mearls have already given the world Iron Heroes. Give them a few more years, while WoW eats into WotC's profits, and the pressure should produce some excellent leadership and creativity.

As do I.
I like WoW. Been playing in it since Beta and only having recently stopped because of the glut and boredom of raiding and the 60s grind. Been looking at EQ II, perhaps just wait till Age of Conan next year. Its ... well internet cafes are prevalent here, so its quite a subculture for anyone between the ages of 11 - 35.
Its the next social thing to do with friends and acquaintances, associates and work colleagues. And yes, there each computer is equipped to handle several language versions of any and most MMO's in the cyvercafes .

One of the main reasons, my gorup got together for the intense 5-6 year gaming streaks was the introduction of the 3.0 ! ... its faded a tad wee bit after 3.5 but we stil played. Then wham! - WoW. I enjoyed the game of course, be still my gamers heart ... but to a few of them (or more) the games got ... more and more important in exclusion of personal relationships and games. I used to play as friends first, till they lulled into acquaintanceship and later retreated to friends at the 'internet' cafes or in WoW. We're on decent terms, and we only exchange greetings whem amd IF i frequent the same internet cafes as they do.
Oop, sorry- i was ranting.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting patiently for ... the excellent leadership and creativity.
... that and the lift on heavy luxury taxes for imported gaming books/products here.

 

[RFisher]

Methinks Mr. Gygax does not share many folks' appreciation of the well-done one-shot game. His loss.

I don't think that's true. In fact, he has mentioned The Abduction of Good King Despot as one of his favorite adventures. He keeps it around for when he needs a ones-shot.

He wrote:

If the effort that goes into playing is not to be wasted, the play must extend over a long period of time so that the effort invested can realize a return.

Which does not mean he can't enjoy a one-shot. Just that to get the most out of the experience, you don't want to do only one-shots.

Can anyone really say they would've gotten as much out of gaming if they played nothing but one-shots?