Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 4577214" data-attributes="member: 43283">Actually, I'd disagree with you right here.First, I haven't found it to be a commonly expressed sentiment at all. In fact, what I've seen expressed far more frequently is how it's one of the major ways for various GMs to "enjoy" the "work" of GMing. It's also quite frequently tied into world-building, which is often cited as another "pay off" for someone GMing.I'd also say that I've seen more than a few people that are of the opinion that a GM _should_ be able to tell a story, and the players are along for the ride. Plenty of people advocate railroading players along, but also advise GMs to hide the fact that players are being railroaded. That way the GM can maintain "control" over the world, gets to tell the stories he's interested in, and players don't have to worry about the "tyranny of choice".  At the end of the day, GMs do what they do for a variety of reasons. Just like people play the game for a variety of reasons. Storytelling _can_ be one reason, but it's _not_ necessarily a primary reason nor does it necessarily have to be a reason for a majority of GMs.Heck, the most common reason _I've_ come across for people being GM? Nobody else is willing to run a game. Well, it's probably matched by the number of people that are on a power trip of one sort or another.You can't definitively say, "[THIS] describes GMing or why GMs do what they do." It can describe an _aspect_ of GMing for some folks, it can be a motivator or reason for others, but there is no single comprehensive way to define it. People can't even bloody agree on how to define _how_ they play an rpg, what an rpg "is" (how do you define an rpg) how "heavy" ("crunchy") a system should be. Plenty of people out there feel that a "rules light" system is essentially worthless and that folks would be better off just doing "free form" roleplaying.Lord, we still have arguments going on about "role playing vs roll-playing" for @#$%@#$% sake.Sorry, nope. All the folks I've played with so far? They really didn't care about the campaign "being" about anything.And I don't run games for them to be "about" anything either. I _can_ and have run games that way, but it's not a primary motivator.What is?Being cool.*shrug*I admit it. Vilify me, beat your chest about how I'm ruining the hobby, whatever. There it is. I'm more interested in folks being able to do "cool" stuff with their character.Now, sometimes that "cool" thing is a story thing. Sometimes it's a righteous smackdown that they're responsible for issuing. It varies.In the interest of "full disclosure"? There's a poll I responded to just today that asked which was more important, Story or Combat? What did I pick? Story.Is that at odds with what I've just written? I don't think so.If I have to pick for something to focus on, it's going to be "a story", as opposed to "Story". There's more to rpgs than simply killing things and taking their stuff. But that doesn't mean that you can't have combat happening in the story as you go along.But "capital S story"? Bore me to @#$%#$% tears. You know all those George Martin books and Wheel of Time books that people love? I consider them to be a blight. I barely managed to make it through two of the Wheel of Time books and I haven't even bothered to pick up the Martin ones. People love 'em, that's great. I personally plan on _never_ reading them, or anything else like 'em.If I have to pick between The Killer (John Woo movie) and Lord of the Rings? The Killer wins. The Matrix and Equilibrium (staring Christian Bale)? Equilibrium.Why?All of 'em are good movies. Yeah, I've actually seen LotR more than once.But the movies I said I'd pick? I'd pick 'em because they had more "cool" stuff going on in 'em. "Cool" doesn't have to mean "combat" or "ass-kicking". The Matrix is better than Equilibrium on a number of fronts; I personally found the story of Equilibrium to be "cooler" than The Matrix. It was more engaging. It's awfully hard to be the lobby scene in The Matrix, although Equilibrium does have a number of "Holy crap! moments as well."I'll take Alias or The Shield over Law & Order. NYPD Blue was much more enjoyable to me than CSI has ever been, despite CSI being a much slicker show.Me? I think about "what would be cool for this game?" It's going to vary depending on the system that's being used, the setting of the game, and what the players want to do. If I can't think of something "cool" that overlaps with all of 'em?I won't run a game.It doesn't mean I don't have some sort of idea for stories. And I'm confident in my ability to have combat feature (or not) in a game I run. I need to have both of these things in order to even consider running a game in the first place. But if I can't get that "cool" thing that bridges stories, combat, and player expectations? No game.</blockquote>

Verification