[RPG] Wonderland Session 1

Last night was the beginning of my Wonderland campaign.

I had more players than I expected, which was a very good thing. I explained the world and background to them, and answered a LOT of questions from a player that is new not only to the system, but roleplaying as a rule. It was really fun being able to explain things in a way that made sense, but gave the sense of mystery and uncertainty that a "new world" offers. I started them off on Miracle City, one of the islands in the ocean of the void. The city itself was Steampunk/Victorian in overall setting. 

I had them roll up characters, and I wound up with the following people: A Sorceress, A Drunk Cop, The Ghost of a Samurai, A Crazy Explorer, An Engineer Plumber and a Miming Clown. 

[Wonderland] Beginnings

Rather than talk and dream and blather about the Wonderland idea, I decided it was time to actually run it.  I'm jumping in.

I'm scheduled to run my first session (intro and character making) tomorrow. I still have some work to do (printouts and maybe clean up the map some more), but I can't back out now...

I'm still not sure if I am crazy or convinced, but I am doing it.

I'll let you know how it goes.

[RPG] A New Direction?

I’m not a team player- at least, not in an RPG. I tend to play characters that have a “hidden agenda”, who like to work behind the scenes, and who are tight-lipped about their motivations.

TheDude noted that I tend to be happiest in games with lots of overlying themes, where I can blend into the background and “do my own thing” without a lot of attention being directed at me or my character. Specific types of games that he mentioned were conspiracy, gritty future, cyber, dark, or some variation of those.

I do enjoy those types of games quite a lot, but I also love the “four color” superhero type of game. My subtle manipulative obscura don’t really fit into the “cape” types well, and as a result, I have struggled while playing in those games.

I knew that playing in the Superhero games I like so much was a struggle, but I hadn’t quite connected why until TheDude helped point out the obvious to me. Superhero games require a lot of openness, sharing of information and implicit trust that are completely contrary to the “under the radar” way I like to operate. 

Some of the most challenging and fun roleplaying I’ve done has been when my character has been trying to keep a separate life, but has been forced into a central role despite all protests and lack of qualifications for the position.

I love these sessions, where I’m forced to work harder to try to cover my tracks, but be part of something bigger as well. I love the duality of “not too much” information, but “not too little”, either.

It was with that thought process that I began to believe that I might be a good GM after all, despite all my trepidations and questions of confidence. The question began to develop in my head –

“How do I transition from a player to a GM?”

I love sharing stories and developing ideas. I love writing and telling stories, and developing great depth. I find bringing compelling characters and rationale for actions to be well worth the effort.

Now, how to bring that out in others?

But it slowly started to roll into my thoughts, in small whispers and snippets of ideas; I already do.

I excel at making others look good. I’m absolutely best when helping others bring out whatever works of art, creations of excellence and genuine inspirations might lie inside them. I’m an excellent muse, the wind that pushes others into greatness.

I’m interested in learning how to “organize people” for some of my professional goals. The ability to get 6-8 people to follow direction, cooperate and perform team activities for 4 hours at a time could be a great asset in some of the fields for which I have interest.

If I could work on those management skills (which need at least some development) while doing some of the things I am really good at, I might have a chance as a GM. Combining my natural talents, best abilities and areas for growth in a hobby oriented situation seems like a great way to achieve the best of both worlds- and maybe have some fun, too.

Uh, did I mention I like to overthink things, as well? 

[RPG] Getting What You Want

A little while ago, Jay over at Life and Times of a Phillipine Gamer shot out his expectations as a player in a game. I posted then that I really admired it- it is far too often that players do not know what they want from a game.

In certain kinds of games, this is ok. I'll say that 4E D&D and Pathfinder offer the option of waiting to see where the adventure takes you. Those games are (as a rule) pretty prescribed into "what do you DO" and not "how do you FEEL".

Other games, it really pays to have some concepts of what you want to do with your character (other than show up to beat on things). Having at least some character development goals can immensely improve your gaming experience. It can enrich the group setting and help everyone have an idea of 'what to do' when moving from place to place in the game.

It is important to talk to the GM and be sure the kinds of expectations you have match or mesh with the kind of game they are running. If you are in a gritty, dark & dirty near future game of some sort, wanting to become a porn star is probably feasible. If you are playing a silly dungeony old school variant, wanting to become a serious magical theoretician is probably not going to work out so well.

In addition to the kind of game, it helps to know that the GM is into the same level of "work" that you want. In one of the games I watch, the GM does a TON of work. If I walked up to him and said "hey, I want to do a bunch of private scenes to help with character development", he would at least consider it. He might say NO because that's adding to his workload, but at least it is in his realm of possibility. If, however, I did the same in Jeff's amazing dungeon game, he would almost definitively say "no". That sort of thing doesn't mesh with his style of running a game, overall.

Overall, I would hope that I'd know before I ever joined a game whether my playstyle and the GM will mesh. I would HOPE that I would investigate and ask questions, and make sure the GM did the same. But it's happened to me more than once when I have gotten in a game where things just didn't work, and I didn't know how to get what I wanted. I've put that knowledge to use, and have learned for the future, but when you're  in the thick of it, it can really suck.

So what do you do when you want something the GM can't or doesn't want to give? How do you handle wanting intense, deeply personal private scenes with a GM that overschedules himself and barely sleeps, much less has time for "bluebooking"?  How do you handle wanting to show up to "beat on stuff" with a GM that really wants character development hooks and rich, thick and immersive play?

Game Breakers

One of the guys that hangs out at my FLGS is pretty well known for finding ways to legally "break" any game he is playing.

A recent case in point involved the following: During a planned, published adventure, buying an ox from the supply table, killing/sacrificing it, and then re-animating it so as to have a Zombie Ox for use in combat. (And rendered the fighter of the party useless in the works.)

His alignment and diety situations were such that this was all totally legal and in no way affected his moral standing nor his ability to gain XP for the adventure.

He liked the idea so much that he did it again in another adventure in the same system (because you don't keep equipment from session to session in the organized play league).

He also formerly ran a droid in one of the Star Wars games where he bought skill chips for any possible scenario, and left all the other PCs twiddling their thumbs.

Sometimes this type of behavior is funny- and the group loves it. Other times it is truly annoying and makes playing NO FUN. Most of the time, it's the response of the GM that bothers me.

The mentality of "well, it's legal so I must allow it" really aggravates me. I like games where GMs and players work together to make things fun, and I don't mind an occasional "here's why I think this might be appropriate" kind of good natured arguement. But when it comes to rules, whether something is allowed, or making the game a sham of what it should be, I'm firmly in the "I'm the GM and I say NO" camp.

Some folks are not good at saying no to other people. Others are so intent on "let's have a good time" that refusing something that is legal (but potentially game breaking) is out of their mindset.

I played with a guy recently who was unintentionally coming close to breaking the game we were in. He kept trying to use OOC knowledge in character and kept justifying it off through very shaky reasoning. The GM in question called him on it several times in very subtle (but effective) ways. The player continued in some of this behavior by asking questions that he really should not have been asking to another player in the game. The other player was doing a pretty good job of avoiding the questions, but my character found the whole thing creepy and told off the offending character.

I knew this player would be a little problematic. He's young and just learning the social aspects of gaming, and still hasn't outgrown the "look what I can do" mentality. He really has not had a lot of opportunity to roleplay (most of his experience has been in miniatures) and so many of the lines between personal knowledge and character knowledge have yet to be drawn. Despite all this, he's a good and willing kid, and I don't mind helping him learn - other people helped me learn when I was in his position.

The difference between these examples, I think, is intent. The first guy INTENDS to to find ways to break the system- and in many cases, takes pleasure in it. The second guy doesn't know better.

There's also a difference in response- the first guy has gotten away with quite a bit because of GMs who don't want to say no, or feel they can't. The second guy has a GM who is not afraid to tell him "stop doing that; it's annoying".

I actively look for GMs that will say no, and avoid the known game breakers as often as possible.