Good GMing

[luckykaa]

So, GMs, where do you get your ideas?  Actually that's not the question.  What is actually involved in running a good game?

I want to run a game, or more to the point, want to get some other people to play and the only way I'll manage is by running it myself.  Only thing is I have very little experience as a GM, and not a huge amount as a player, so I really don't know what's involved in making a game good.  Railroading is bad but is anything resembling railroading totally out of the question?  Is it a good idea to occasionally stick a signpost somewhere?  If the GM throws a problem in the way should he have some idea of how to solve it?  What should you do if the players suddenly decide that a piece of scenery is the key to the adventure? How do you balance difficulty?  What do you do if the players are not proactive enough?

A lot of you guys are roleplayers so what do you think works and doesn't? 

Comments

Things i have learnt:

[invisigoth51.livejournal.com]

"players suddenly decide that a piece of scenery is the key to the adventure?" Find a way to make it important/dangerous and explode (remember the gazebo?)

Have more than one angle - one set of bad guys is never enough, 3 or 4 is better, no one should be too clear cut good/evil - let the NPC's have good motivation so the players can question there own actions.

Problems - yes you should have several ideas how to solve it - your PC's will probably come up with something different and so long as it's good go with that - but it's important the problem isn't too hard - what seems obvious to you may be more obscure for them and you DO NOT want PC frustrationl.

I've used signposting and an amount of railroading in comedy/lighthearted one off types but i wouldn't recomend it in long running games or more serious ones.

Have intrigue.

In the end some games are just doomed to fail - acknowledge if it isn't going well and if you can't save it abandon it and do something more fun.

[callylevy.livejournal.com]

Exciting stuff! Must try not to mount soapbox! Here are some brief answers to start off:

"Railroading is bad but is anything resembling railroading totally out of the question?"

Actually railroading is not necessarily bad, but you need to let the players feel they have control (even if they don't). So having a number of ways in which they could discover plot, and movable scenes/plot devices/items etc. (e.g. if it is important that they overhear conversation x to learn y, have in mind a couple of ways they could hear the conversation (e.g. at a couple of locations) and perhaps a couple of ways they could learn y without overhearing any conversation!

Occasionally sticking signposts in can be a good plan, just so the players feel that they following some sort of plot and that you know what's going on. It's also quite comforting for newer players, I suspect.

"If the GM throws a problem in the way should he have some idea of how to solve it?"

Opinions vary on this, but I always think yes. The players may find a different way to solve a problem, or get round it, and that's great. But when I'm playing I'm incredibly frustrated if I come across a problem and there doesn't seem to be any way to solve it (and yet the GM seems to think I should solve it). It's not an issue if it's a problem that you know cannot be solved, but if you genuinely want the players to solve the problem, have at least one idea in mind as to how they can - in case they get completely stuck and you need to give them a hint in some way. You can't give them a hint if you have no idea how to solve it either.

"What should you do if the players suddenly decide that a piece of scenery is the key to the adventure?"

Your call. If you like their idea, you might decide to make the scenery the key to the adventure, and have Barman Number 13 become the most important NPC in the plot! (Don't tell them that he was scenery!) Or you can let them chase the red herring until they're bored and move back to the real stuff. Or you can gently lead them back to the real stuff, e.g. if they decide Uninteresting Tribe is key and want to travel with them, let them travel with Uninteresting Tribe for a bit and then make Uninteresting Tribe be attacked by Real Plot People, or witness a Real Plot Event.

"How do you balance difficulty?"

Not sure quite what you're asking. Do you mean, if the plot is too hard for the players? My approach is to have a number of clues and hints, plot items, cut scenes etc that I could give to the players on a plate, and then don't give them all out unless the players are struggling. So for example, I might hope that PlayerCharacter is going to decide to go to ImportantLocation. If they haven't quite got the hang of things, and don't go, I might get PersuasiveNPC to go to ImportantLocation, or to have PlayerCharacter receive a note to go to ImportantLocation, or to change ImportantLocation to PlayerCharactersBloomingLivingRoom.

If you mean difficulty in terms of numbers - then quite simply, I keep numbers that aren't the players' own stats secret, and I'll cheat my dice rolls if necessary for the sake of a good game for all. If my BadGuy rolls an incredible roll that would kill off the whole party a moment after they enter the room, I may decide that is conducive to a good game and decide to ignore that freak occurance.

"What do you do if the players are not proactive enough?"

I've probably answered that already. I'm quite a kind GM - I don't punish people for not having enough ideas. Building up their confidence by using the hints etc will probably help, as will signposting that they're on the right track occasionally!

GMing is massive fun! Look forward to hearing all about it!

Mich x

[callylevy.livejournal.com]

Ah, classy typo above - killing off the party immediately is NOT conducive to a good game (unless it's a really twisted game - or a really infuriating party *grins*).

[luckykaa.livejournal.com]

"Not sure quite what you're asking. Do you mean, if the plot is too hard for the players?"

Basically, yeah. If I have a complicated plot where the identical twin brother used a slow acting poison over the past 10 months and then assumed the other brothers identity, but the players completely overlook the bottle that says "slow acting poison" I clearly need to add an extra clue.

So I guess I was asking if there's a more subtle way of revealing that than dropping something in front of them.

[callylevy.livejournal.com]

I would provide in addition to your best clue (the bottle) some 'other ways of suspecting' that aren't as direct, just in case, so for example an NPC who knew the victim a little and noticed that he got steadily ill for 10 months and then made a full recovery, wow. Or a photo that someone has of the two brothers together. So various other ways that the players could discover information even if it is not as directly helpful as the slow acting poison bottle - or possibly even give them reasons to return to the crime scene.

And if there is something that the players really MUST do at a particular location, I sometimes make sure that an NPC is with them that they tend to listen to (e.g. brother, best friend, mentor) who could 'discover' something that they don't understand. e.g. "hmmm, this medicine cabinet appears to be locked. Oh well." Player: "let me see that..."

[blazingskies.livejournal.com]

I've not been GM-ing for very long, but there's a few thing I've picked up that I've found helpful to remember.

1) Stay flexible. No matter how good the plot you came up with is, I guarantee that at some point you (or one of your players) will come up with something better, don't be afraid to incorporate this into the plot.

2) Leaving clues for the characters is good. The more obscure the better. They get a kick out of deciphering the hidden meanings. Don't worry if they get it wrong. worry even less if what they come up with is better than what you had in mind (see 1). Using archetypes is a good way of 'hiding plot in plain sight' as well.

3) Multiple Paths - aka 'all roads lead to Rome'. Give your players plenty of choices about where to go, and what mission to undertake next, but have consequences for each choice. Perhaps one choice leads to a weapon or a clue that can help the party, while another leads to a nice bit of character development for one character?

4) Down time. Keeping momentum is good, but sometimes even characters need a break from the action. Some small, character-based subplots set in a city/base/outpost/kumquat is often a good idea for character development and for the purposes of getting the party to know each other better.

5) Game balance. Balancing how complicated to make your puzzles and plot is just one of those things that takes practice, unfortunately.
You can either make it fairly straightforward to start with, and then gradually build up the complications over time, or you can dump them in the middle of a complicated situation that they have to unravel. If they get stuck, you can give them a GM Poke from the occasional prophecy, words from mentors, guidance from the gods, etc.

6) The Big Rule - You are the GM. Therefore, as far as your players are concerned, you are God, and what you say goes. Don't ever be intimidated by your players, and don't be afraid to change or ignore a rule if it doesn't make sense.

Hope that helps!

[callylevy.livejournal.com]

And a broader thought - I suggest that your important NPCs always have a life of their own. ie. that you have some idea what they get up to when the players aren't around, who their friends are, and what their aim in life is, as a minimum. This really helps with making them real, but also helps in providing contacts/locations/angles etc through which the players can find them or find out things about them.

For example, the netrunner Dove (whom you now know) has a connection with a particular gang who took her in as a teenager. It's not relevant to most plots that involve her, but it does mean that should the players go off the beaten track and end up in gangland, I have a perfectly legitimate reason for Dove to turn up and interact with the gang and the players, and lead them back to the plot if necessary!

[luckykaa.livejournal.com]

Thanks for mounting your soapbox.

I was certainly impressed with the level of detail in the Cyberpunk game you ran. I got the feeling that if I decided that I'd randomly leap on a bus and hijack it for no good reason you'd have had a character sheet for the driver.

a lot of my concerns are really from third hand accounts of bad GMing. Mostly that's about railroading or getting stuck (in one case players spent an hour trying to get a cup of coffee)

[omylouse.livejournal.com]

Agreeing with callylevy!

If you're doing a one off (as I assume you are if unsure how it'll hold?) signposting stuff in a subtle way will help keep it to a one off rather than dragging it out. As a player I have no problem with signposts if done well & within the story. It's the whole create a world for players to explore rather than a story they must follow to the letter.

I've never GM'd I think I would be remarkably bad at it. But I do like brainstorming ideas & will happily play or test play anything (or NPC if that'll help?) :)

[luckykaa.livejournal.com]

But I do like brainstorming ideas & will happily play or test play anything (or NPC if that'll help?) :)

Cool. Can I interest you in puppetland (http://johntynes.com/revland2000/rl_puppetland_www.html)?

[omylouse.livejournal.com]

It sounds interesting... I have a feeling I would be absolutely rubbish at keeping in character all the time though!

[luckykaa.livejournal.com]

It's not as hard as it sounds. It's only an hour.

[omylouse.livejournal.com]

I might be up for giving it a go - so long as I don't get yelled at if I do lapse!

[luckykaa.livejournal.com]

Well, you know how angry I can get.

The worst that will happen is you being mocked ever so slightly. Even that's unlikely.

[raygungothic.livejournal.com]

I think my biggest improvement in GMing came when I started to consciously try to give each player a share of the limelight. Clear differences between characters help for this - which is why I've started liking systems with character classes again, at least in some circumstances.

"Railroading" is only when you totally overrule the players' desires. Some steering is not a bad thing; a total absence of steering can easily lead to directionlessness. It's easier to relax the steering in a campaign, where there's no pressure to reach a conclusion by the end of the day, but there still needs to be some occasionally. My way around this problem is to visualise scenes - the finale, the key points - then imagine a world around them and allow my players to find their own way from key scene to key scene. I take as much as I can from the players' input and will often rearrange those set pieces to fit the way the players have shaped the story. Some things still have to be dead ends, and clearly signposting dead ends is one of the most acceptable forms of steering - players won't thank you if you don't.

If you throw a problem in the players' way, you need to have thought of at least two ways of solving it, and you also need to be prepared for the players' plan to be one you totally didn't think of. Sometimes they'll step right over something you intended to be difficult - don't begrudge them this, but make sure you have "spare" challenges in reserve for when this happens. Other times something you thought will be easy will look like an impenetrable obstacle to them - then you may need to gently make them aware of the existence of alternative routes (and have those spare challenges again). Either way, making sure they face the right number of challenges is up to you, and you should be quite prepared to intervene to make sure they do.

Shorter golden rules:
- Players cannot do anywhere near as much as you think they will in any given amount of session time.
- Fight scenes must be planned short, because the amount of detail people demand will always make them longer.
- Investigators almost always accidentally confide in the villain
- If it's obvious to you, it's totally inobvious to them
- Steal from TV and cinema
- You always think it sucked, even if they think it rocked, because you know what you meant it to be and they only know what they actually experienced.

[invisigoth51.livejournal.com]

Absolutely must agree with all raygungothic's golden rules.

Stealing from TV and Cinema is a massive help - i tend not to use any particular thing from series; but I genre-match quite heavily. I feel it is very important to tell players what style to expect so they know what the hidden rules are.

For example, in a retro action hero game, (think 60s batman or star trek the orignal) the heroes may get in tough scrapes but CANNOT DIE. IT is okay to have this be something that the players can be conscious of.
Similarly, in a genre like that, heroes (PCs) wouldn't ever kill a surrendering baddie - even if he would likely escape again later...

What I'm saying is that by discussing the mood, intensity etc of the game beforehand, the results for everyone improve. Simple system is to agree on a genre, then agree on a film ratings classification - U, PG, ...
This will help determine the actual consequences of violence far better than a rules book.

Good luck

[invisigoth51.livejournal.com]

BTW this last post was missingachair, not invisigoth. forgot to log in

Are you a planner or a trailblazer?

[tyrshundr.livejournal.com]

I second all of GM Ray's rules.

I divide GM approaches into two groups:

Planners -
Behaviour: before the game begins sit down and create the overarching plot then fill in the NPCs, draft character sheets for all major NPCs, location descriptions, write out dialogue for all the characters, plan the first two sessions in detail &c. Repeat between sessions
Identifying Marks: Have a bundle of notes, likes fairness
Advantage: The plan is a great safety net
Disadvantage: no plan survives contact with a PC

Trailblazers -
Behaviour: come up with an idea for an overarching plot just before the session, scribble down some NPC names whilst the players are generating characters, leaves working out a scene until the players are leaving the previous one,
Identifying marks: Never writes anything down, likes talking
Advantage: the plot is always adapting to the PCs so the events are based on recent performance and player interests
Disadvantage: Extreme mental effort

These are of course gross stereotypes; however there is a grain of truth in them.

As a Trailblazer, I would warn you of the risks of over-planning and over-thinking. come up with a treatment, as Hollywood calls it, them fill in the detail with a bit of jamming on the day.

And , because it bears repeating as a fundamental truth: You always think it sucked, even if they think it rocked, because you know what you meant it to be and they only know what they actually experienced

[talismancer]

Various things:

First, I used to work with some really high quality GMs over at a site called Strike to Stun. It's a Warhammer based sites, but one gent wrote a series of articles called "A Carrot and a Stick - tips for making GMs life easier", which have been being republished. The archive is here: http://www.strike-to-stun.net/category/wfrp/gm-aids and you can get to the rest of StS from there. That's my main source of ideas and guides for GMing.

Second, there are various rules I have started to adopt to ensure as little as possible goes wrong. This is greatly aided by the Tuesday group being good kind players, I've never GMed for a nicer bunch. In no particular order:
If there's something the PCs can't afford to miss, just tell them that they spotted it. If you like make a roll behind the screen first so they may feel it's random, but it's not, because it's essential. This can work in parts too, so I pointed out the shape under the bush in the road (Kastor), but then let you lot explore the corpse.

(At this point, I've just noticed that I'm about to repeat the comments I made on part 10 of the articles linked to above, so I'll link you to the comments too: Link)

That should give you enough reading for a while.

[ingaborg.livejournal.com]

Excellent tips - thanks everyone!

I'm a character player, so my personal hate is if the GM expects me to make my character do something for the sake of the plot, that I don't think is what they'd actually do in that situation. So my absolute rule is that while players may have out-of-character discussions about strategy, when it comes to what the characters do, the GM should never, ever try to push them into doing something wrong for the character.

Railroading is fine, if it's sensible in context. For example you can put the party on a train! But it isn't a lot of fun if you get into a fight and feel that you were destined to lose it because the plot requires that the villain escapes. Or that you are being pushed into going to a particular pub...

[vanir.livejournal.com]

Well nicking stuff from campaigns you've played in but your players haven't is a very quick and easy way of doing things, but you don't have a huge amount of experience as a player, so I won't recommend that. So steal from TV, Cinema and books instead.

My personal style was a kind of "simulator", where key characters were fleshed out in some detail, particularly motivations, methods and desires, and worked from there. Then you have some guiding points for working out the consequences of the player actions. If players confide in the villain, then the villain has a better idea how to get away with things and frame someone else. Of course if it's a flawed plan, the setup might backfire on the villain - then your player's ineptitude have actually created a twist and made your story look even better.

Something that really doesn't work is running a game where the players know more about the situation than you do. It's difficult for a GM with a cosy life to run a dark and gritty game set on the streets when one of your players is a copper and deals with that kind of stuff on a regular basis...