Daggerheart "Description on Demand" a GM DON'T

[kigmatzomat]

Gonna be honest, I hate it by default. Of the five or six GMs who've tried it over the decades (I'm oooooold) all but one failed at what I considered vital: making what the players contributed actually be part of the world. Not everything of course, but if players describe a bunch of NPCs and the GM doesn't incorporate any of that into actual play its just infuriating.

The one GM who did a really good job had the game implode as the approach changed the group dynamic. The loud extrovert got even more opportunities to speak and crowded out everyone else.

Lie others, I am a GM 90% of the time, so my play time is "recharge" time. I need something more engaging than Talisman but less demanding than GMing.

And a lot of my players also use gaming as a way to escape their life, which is mostly a lot of technical work where people ignore what they say. A situation fraught with peril, you might say.

 

[darjr]

I think for me, turning off my GM brain lets me enjoy the plater experience more and shuts off any impulses to “backseat drive”.

I’m kinda jealous.

 

[zakael19]

The one GM who did a really good job had the game implode as the approach changed the group dynamic. The loud extrovert got even more opportunities to speak and crowded out everyone else.

So this technique/ play style really should be used in combination with directed spotlighting and GM as facilitator conversation management. You don’t ask the group something, you ask a single character something. And then you keep a little running counter in your GM brain of who’s been in the spotlight the most and pivot over to somebody else next time.

I run 4 person tables (down to 3 is ok too), so we’re doing high-engagement & intimate stuff. I’m pretty up front in my solicitation posts about the level of engagement and contribution my games demand from the players and so far all the ones that have showed up and stayed rise to the demands.

 

[BruceWright]

I was in a Daggerheart oneshot where the GM asked up front for each of us what our relationship to a certain NPC was, and then once that NPC showed up he ignored that. So yeah, that can be frustrating. But then that GM frustrated player choices multiple times that session.

It wasn't the method's fault. It was a GM issue.

 

[Reynard]

I was in a Daggerheart oneshot where the GM asked up front for each of us what our relationship to a certain NPC was, and then once that NPC showed up he ignored that. So yeah, that can be frustrating. But then that GM frustrated player choices multiple times that session.

It wasn't the method's fault. It was a GM issue.

Maybe that GM bit off more than they could chew, and maybe have been better served to ask "You know NPC. Describe your disposition toward them in a word." Stuff like that is easier to manage and can be expanded upon should it come up.

 

[Senior_WotC_Janitor]

On my dying day one thing I know I will be glad of is that I will never have to hear the word "immersion" again and listen to people talk about it like everybody understands what it means. Bl.eep

Mod Edit: Language. ~Umbran

 

[payn]

On my dying day one thing I know I will be glad of is that I will never have to hear the word "immersion" again and listen to people talk about it like everybody understands what it means. Bl.eep

 

[Reynard]

On my dying day one thing I know I will be glad of is that I will never have to hear the word "immersion" again and listen to people talk about it like everybody understands what it means. Bl.eep

I mean, "immersion" isn't an esoteric term. It isn't hard to figure out.

That said, I don't think it is especially important to TTRPGs. Others disagree, of course.

 

[zakael19]

I mean, "immersion" isn't an esoteric term. It isn't hard to figure out.

That said, I don't think it is especially important to TTRPGs. Others disagree, of course.

The problem is everybody has their own definition for what it takes to get them immersed if anything at all works!

 

[Vael]

TBH, expecting a sharp divide of Player and GM responsibilities on world-building seems short-sighted and ... maybe if people are so precious about their sandboxes they'd be better off writing their own fiction without others messing it up?

Sorry, too aggressive. But building a character to exist in a campaign alters the world to incorporate said character. I sat down at a 5e table where the GM decided that Magic was shunned and outlawed. So naturally, I chose to be a Wizard ;-P ... (Just a sidenote, with the GM's approval.) I actually don't like playing Wizards, but I liked the idea of being a Wizard in this world because how did I study something forbidden? And so I ended up with a Criminal background, because I studied with a magical Mob. The GM hadn't built a Magical Mob, but we together extrapolated that if Magic was pushed underground, then it'd be criminals that studied and used it, and therefore organized crime that used Magic and had the network to actually have the tomes to study.

A PC isn't an island of a character alone in a GM's ocean. Or ... I'd tire of only playing orphaned murder hobos without a friend in the world. And I think it's asking a lot for the GM to build my PC's social life.