Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 6230307" data-attributes="member: 16586">I can't speak for anyone else, but when I run a game I don't want to have a better idea of where the game is headed than my players. The ideal situation for me is for one conflict to lead to another with complications arising naturally out of play. I don't frame scenes with an end goal in mind - the entire point is to see what will happen. I think our <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?347648-The-chamberlain-the-king-and-the-dragon-(drobe)" target="_blank">Chamberlain Experiment</a> is a pretty good example of this play style at work. I don't think anyone could have anticipated that a skill challenge to persuade a chamberlain to let us see the king would result in a tale of conflicting faiths, redemption of a creature lost to the shadows, and obligations vs. friendship.Right now I'm preparing to run a game of Demon: The Descent once my books from the <a href="http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/200664283/demon-the-descent-prestige-edition" target="_blank">Kickstarter</a> arrive. One of the central conflicts of Demon is that the protagonists (PCs) possess a great deal of power, but more flagrant displays capture the attention of their enemies. The game has a tiered power structure where more powerful abilities not only have a resource cost, but expose players to Compromise rolls of varying difficulties. It's a mechanic with real teeth - when you fail a Compromise roll you select from a menu of narrative conditions that are then invoked in play which when resolved result in experience for the PC. I don't think I could have a clear handle on where the game is going, and I love that about the game. Players make choices that will have direct implications on the fiction - that's the point.Compare this to the experience of playing a Solar in Exalted where careful use of Charms is encouraged, but there is no teeth in the rules of the game to reflect that. As a player it can be difficult to see the correlation between action and consequence. As a GM I must take a more active hand in deciding the appropriate result of flashy displays of power. I have to decide what happens - not see.In general I operate on a few key principles when I run games:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Anything worth doing can be done better with practice. If I can step into a scene during resolution and have a direct hand in how it will turn out then I don't have to be disciplined in scene framing, encounter design, etc. I'll never learn to run a game better if I do not have to deal with the consequences.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">As much as possible the link between player decisions and consequences of their actions should be visible to the players.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Push hard on both sides of the screen and see what happens.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If a result is unacceptable don't allow situations where it can happen. If it is unacceptable for a PC or NPC to die anticlimatically the rules / framed scenes should not allow for that possibility.</li> </ul>The reason why I like RPGs is precisely because of unexpected results. Even when I'm running a game it should feel more like improvisational jazz than a conducted orchestra. Yes, sometimes one of us hits a wrong note, but it can only get better the more we play together.</blockquote>

Verification