It's not a bad idea to do so, but ultimately this is an entirely leisure activity and people should engage it however they want. There's no mandate to be a "better GM" (whatever that means for any individual judge of "good GMing"). Some folks are super happy with the game(s) they play, how they play them, with neither need nor desire to branch out or broaden their horizons or whatever.
I agree. Trying new games is certainly something that people should be open to.
And they're missing out, and stunting their GMing and roleplaying skills. And they are skills, just like any other hobby has. More than some.
Should is an ideal not a proscriptive statement. I'm not going to strap someone to a chair with some weird device attached to their head to force their eyes to stay open A Clockwork Orange style or anything like that.
And some folk think they are perfectly happy never knowing the joy of chicken tikka masala. Maybe they avoided Indian food for years because their mother cooked something with curry once, and it was so bad he decided all Indian food must be bad. But then, one day, he said, "I'm a big boy now (I'm 41), and I'm going to try Indian food," and once he did, he realized just how much he had been missing over the years. (He loves his mother, but she's a horrible cook.) No, there's no reason example is so very, very specific.
Man the first time I let a girlfriend bully me into eating sushi...so much regret for so much missed sushi. I'm just glad I was only 19, not 41. That's rough, buddy.
That's true, but PbtA games are strongly genre-simulative with major narrative mechanics and that doesn't really work for me as a GM anyway.
I'm not sure what you mean by "major narrative mechanics". The basic structure of the mechanics in AW is not very different from 1977 Traveller, or even modern D&D.
That's basically what I mean. The rules are designed to emulate the genre, and so the GM is restricted in how to adjucate situations ("scene framing", to use a term I've seen you use often). I generally want my sim to be process as opposed to genre.
Right? It's such a weird attitude. It's playing a game. Once it becomes work or a job it's no longer play. Once it's no longer fun, what's the point? If the players are bent about the referee not being tip top or not striving for perfection, they can run the game themselves. Play how you like to. Gather with other people, hopefully friends, who like to play in similar ways to you...or at least not diametrically opposed ways to yours. Throw dice, have fun. It's a hobby, no a side hustle to be perfected and/or monetized.
Apocalypse World doesn't rely heavily on scene framing techniques - there are indie games that do!, but it's not really one.
Hmm. AW really isn't built to emulate genre. It has a strong genre vibe, yes, but it's system is built to generate drama and put characters through the wringer. The genre is backdrop to that. Which is why PbtA uses the same core system across a ton of genres, with the hacks being to shift the kind of drama.
