Effective GM'ing

[Milo Bloom]

Well since VagabondDM seems to be in some sort of wierd limbo, I will now rack up posts on this account.

In an effort to get some ideas out of my head I have started writing various articles.

My first love as stated by my previous Enworld account is DM/GM'ing.

So I naturally started with some bits related to that subject.

In a an effort to be as accurate and complete I am submitting each section here for input from the board members.

the 1st section will follow

 

[Milo Bloom]

Part 1

[removed until rewritten or scrapped all together] ^_^

 

[Milo Bloom]

Now I know that my writing is not that uber that it's not deserving of critique. ^_^

 

[Gospog]

Interesting

Milo,

Thanks for sharing this. I'm assuming this is an opinion piece, as you are speaking about a subject raised in your own gaming experience.

I'm no professional editor, but I did enjoy your article, and provide the following critique with my regards:

I understand that there is a strong tendency in western society to emphasize the ideas of "winning" and "losing". These are very dangerous notions when you're planning on running any sort of game.

I find this to be patently untrue. Outside or RPGs ("any sort of game"), winning and losing are the entire point of many games. Speaking only of RPGs (as you probably are) this is a matter of preference. Different groups of Players and GMs prefer different levels of competition.

An example of competition being preferred in RPGs is when one Player competes against another. This is a common occurence in RPGs other than D&D, such as Dying Earth, and happens in D&D as well (at least my own games).
In D&D, as long as the competition is approached in a mature fashion, it can be fun for everyone involved.

I believe competition between Players and GM is an occurence that directly impacts (and must refer to) the rules of the game. When looking at it in this way, your statement is correct (or, at least, I agree).

Possibly in some pathetic attempt to prove that they're better than the players. These sad individuals suffer under the delusion that they're "winning" if the players can't figure things out or if their characters drop like flies.

Um, if you're trying to objective here, you failed. Are you sure this isn't a "rant"? Did someone upset you like this recently? Today?

Who wants to go to a game of any kind where they already know that they're going to lose... somehow.

In the context of your previously stated opinions, this is an excellent way to phrase this. Nice.

If you're that hung up on the concepts of "winning" and "losing", consider this simple solution to the dilemma:

Do the people you have described see this situation as a dilemma? From your previous description ("...pathetic...sad individuals..."), they probably do not.

Should your comments, then, instead be aimed at the players who must suffer such a boorish GM? Would that do more good?

If it doesn't make you happy to see your players having fun, then maybe you'd be happier as a player yourself.

This is much clearer, as it offers a solution to the implied problem, and a likely audience for said solution.

I hope you don't mind the critical aspects of my critique. I enjoyed reading your thoughts on this subject. You described this as the first section, will this be a series, then?

 

[Umbran]

Re: Part 1

You want critique? Okay....

I have encountered so many GMs who believe that they either have to kill off at least one character a game session, or put in clues that only have meaning to someone who already knows the solution. Why? Possibly in some pathetic attempt...

There are three major problems with this section.

The first is the personal anecdotal statement, "I have encountered so many...". It has two flaws - first, it depends on your own authority for it's validity (it is your experience that matters). But you've done absolutly nothing to support the assertion that you are an authority. Secondly, anecdotal evidence, personal or otherwise, is a lousy support for a position.

Market research from a fairly reasonable authority, WOTC, suggests the existance of a couple of million gamers. That implies some hundreds of thousands of GMs. You say you've seen "So many." How many? Is it a meaningful number out of those hundreds of thousands? Probably not. There are only very few people who can make believeable statements about large numbers of gamers and their tendencies. You haven't established yourself as one of them, rendering your position very weak.

The second problem is the thoroughly speculative nature of your conclusion: "Possibly...". Yes, possibly it's for the reason you state, but possibly not. Perhaps those GMs like to kill one PC a game because they simply like the tension created by high stakes and risks. The fact that you can state a possibility doesn't make it a fact, and nothing else you say supports the speculation as truth. Everything that follows that "possibly" is thus poorly supported.

Third comes the insulting nature of your speculation. You call it a "pathetic attempt". If a random person of no known pedigree were to call you pathetic, would you be particularly disposed to take his words to heart, or would you be more likely to be hostile to his point of view? Only rarely are insults a useful teaching tool.

 

[Milo Bloom]

Good points both...I admit it comes off a little heavy handed. I do have that tendency in my writing. It's been a bad problem from back in my usenet days. Thus my submitting here...so it's heavy handed, you've both pointed that out. Any suggestions on making it less so? ^_^

As for authority, really no one has that sort of authority but I've been GM'ing for a really long time. So I like to think I've learned a thing or two in my time. Even if one of those things isn't keeping my ego in check.


Milo

 

[Privateer]

Are You Uncle Figgy?

If you aren't Uncle Figgy, then you've just had a brilliant streak, or you just plagarized him. If you are Uncle Figgy, then... here's a link to your site.

The Same Article, But To the Casual Observer By Someone Else: http://members.aol.com/essuncius/chap1.html

It's the exact same wording, but with a different title.

 

[Milo Bloom]

That is remarkably close. I will ask the admins to remove this then until I can do something of a rewrite. I do think I went on a different tangent than he did.