Essential GM Advice

[ebear]

btw sorry I had intended to post that as a response TeatroMensa but I’m still learning the interface here

I think “collaborative storytelling” would be clear to a lot of people and implies a lot about a game. I’m always looking for new ways people might describe what they want from play. Especially ways to describe it for folks who are maybe new to RPGs and don’t have as many points of reference.

But I think what you called out about these not being “mutually exclusive axes” is important. There’s no reason you can’t like all these styles for different reasons.

[noah_t]

This is somewhere between Jeremy Strandberg’s guide to “Writing Up a Front” and Apocalypse World’s “Look Through Crosshairs,” but I wish I had learned earlier to build status quos that are in motion. I spent so many games afraid to let things change unless the PC’s were directly involved. Now I build precarious situations, factions at each other’s throats, families one week away from ruin. And to follow through on that motion. If the PCs don’t interact with these elements, I can still let them feel the ripples of those events in the background. If they do, the interaction between their characters and the status quo’s inbuilt tension leads to much more dynamic narratives than either alone.

[TeatroMensa]

I tell them that I aim to create what some call “Grand Argument Stories.”

Granted, doing so simply as an author is severe enough. Doing so with random variables, including human behavior, makes ending an RPG “campaign” or series of sessions resolve into a coherent story, even a bad one, improbable.

It’s not quite as “bad” as the universe coming from an ex nihilo explosion, but it’s up there.

In the interests of transparency, of late, my forays into the “GM” world have been few. Not many people want to do stories or, more to the point, they want to do stories and whatever they want in a game.

Can’t do both, and most players read that as “railroading,” when all but perhaps the most chaotic sandbox that permits almost anything could face the same charges for the same causes.

This isn’t a bad thing, however. You want your gun to fail at the gate, not in sector, and there’s no point in anyone joining that doesn’t want, or doesn’t get, what you’re trying to do.

“Win/win, or no deal.”

Expectations are a bear. Best to kill them young and small, unless they serve, or at least don’t obstruct, everyone’s purposes for playing.

[TeatroMensa]

I’d call it “fiction on the fly,” with the caveat that, like music, if one hasn’t learned to write and play first then one is far more likely to end with noise complaints, instead of accolades.

[Paul_T]

A few things come to mind for me which I haven’t seen other people mention (I’ll try not to be redundant here):

• Play with honesty and clarity. Try to make sure that costs, consequences, and considerations are always clear to the players, at all times. Practice transparency of method and clarity of communication: there is enough murk and confusion in real life, human communication, and a fictional reality that working extra hard to be clear is always welcome. Do say, “if you do that, you might knock the Wookie off the cliff - we’ll probably have her make a Dexterity check - are you OK with that?”, or “if you fail this roll, you could lose some hit points, which will make it harder to use your spells until the end of the session”, or perhaps, “…you should know that if any of you decide to attempt the archery challenge, we’ll resolve it using a Long Contest where none of your Personal Traits will apply.” Also say, “John, I’m setting up a scary scene where you’ll have little say over the outcome - are you cool with that?”, as well as, “I’m really curious to see where Lando’s loyalties lie, so in this session, I’m going to lean on that extra hard. OK? Lando’s player, is it cool if the other players pitch in on that too, adding even more pressure to your character?”

• Along the same lines, don’t be “mysterious” or put on an unreadable poker face. Cheer, boo, laugh at the stuff that’s happening and tell the players how you feel about it. Maybe it’s a case of saying, “Wow, I can’t believe Rogar pulled off that stunt! I never thought he could, and that was one of my favourite moments in this session!”, in order to celebrate a major success with a player. Or maybe it’s a case of saying, “Wow, Duke Dooku is such an asshole. Even though he’s my NPC, I will probably be dreaming about throttling him in my sleep. I hope he gets his just desserts in the end!” Share. Don’t be quiet.

• Listen to your players even when you might not be supposed to, and take as much of their input as possible into the game. When they shout out suggestions, say, “Yes! That’s exactly what happens!” more often than not. Your games will be better for it and your players will be more involved and more invested. (But also know your games well enough to know the moments where you shouldn’t do so! Know the places and times where that would undercut the creative goals of your game.)

• When prepping for a game, try to limit yourself to material that’s already been introduced by the players. For instance, if you need a “bad guy”, look through the character sheets first, and see if any character has a hated enemy or a nemesis or a father figure who died during the Clone Wars, and bring that in, rather than making something up whole cloth.

Some of my best game experiences have come from making a rule for myself not to introduce or prep anything that doesn’t come from or flow directly from something on a character sheet or that a player has said. It makes GMing feel so easy, and leads to such consistent quality!

[Jason_Kottler]

Part of the magic of GUMSHOE is that the general ability pools are a spotlight management mechanism disguised as a skill system!