Experience and Gamemastering
To paraphrase Gary Gygax from "Master of the Game", the principal author of an RPG (be it Dungeon Master or Storyteller or any other term you prefer, which here will be abbreviated "GM" or generalized as "Gamemaster") must necessarily be informed on absolutely everything. Since a GM is responsible pretty much for the entire world that a set of players will experience, it behooves him to study widely in order to use that experience to his best advantage.
There is another field in which experience will benefit a GM, but one that does not apply itself equally (or at all) to all GMs. It is, however, a pet peeve of mine, and as the pulpit is mine for the moment, I will make use of it.
Many gamemasters will try to twist an existing set of rules - Dungeons&Dragons being the most common, but other systems as well - into a setting, or mode of gaming, for which it is not well suited. Sometimes the publishing company itself will issue supplements or official rulings to this effect (Spelljammer comes to mind); other times, in-house modifications to existing rules are made.
I would like to offer my definition for what a "good" game system is.
<blockquote>A good game system is one which requires a minimal amount of rules modification to satisfy a maximum number of players and gamemasters.</blockquote>
This is a statistically verifiable measure. Many game systems - Amber, Shadowrun, Call of Cthulhu, and so forth - are optimized for one environment, one gameworld. These game systems have their adherents, and rightly so - if that is the only mode of gaming the play group enjoys.
Other game systems make certain mechanical assumptions about the world and about game play which make it difficult to adopt or justify those systems to uses other than they were intended. I will use Dungeons & Dragons as an example, but many other candidates exist.
D&D is founded on a simple premise: fantasy roleplaying with an emphasis on tactical, detailed combat between small numbers of participants. To that end it has section after section of detailed combat rules, movement and attack modifiers, spell listings with sharply-defined areas of effect and casting times, and so on. Advancement is provided by defeating monsters; enough "experience points", and a character gains an "experience level", making them more physically able, as well as competent in other ways (increased availability of spells, unique special abilities and the like).
Compare this to another game - Vampire: the Masquerade, published by White Wolf. Its premise is a little more detailed but can be summarized as: roleplaying in a modern setting with supernatural elements, most notably vampires, which the PCs are cast as. While Vampire includes a comprehensive list of combat rules, it deals with other elements as well: the onset of insanity, the various virtues (compassion, courage and so forth) and their impact on a character's actions, and political actions between vampires. It focuses as much on social as physical confrontations.
Both games, within their sphere, are well thought out and will serve their players and GMs, if the modes of play are agreeable to the group as a whole. However, what if a play group wishes (for example) to play out a small group of courtiers in a historical or fantasy setting? Such characters will be ill-suited for any sort of combative role, and combat will occur almost never - instead, diplomatic dealings and social maneuvering will be the order of the day. Is D&D the logical game system for such a campaign? Probably not, at least without modification.
It is at this point that a GM faces a choice - is the set of rules he's using (or familiar with) the proper one for the game he intends to run? And if not, is there another set of rules out there more applicable? Experience with a variety of game systems proves useful here. And if he intends to stick with his current set, what modifications will he be required to make? It is at this point that a GM can truly measure the worth of the system he is endeavoring to use.
Further, wide familiarity with gaming systems in use benefit a GM who does not use such systems as the prime mechanical foundation for his game - if a ruling which a GM must make has already been sensibly made and thoroughly playtested in an established system not his own, the wise GM will not seek to re-invent the wheel if that ruling can be adapted to his current game.
Players, too, will base many of their own actions (both "in character" and as themselves) based on the mechanics available. If no ruling exists for a situation, many players reason, it would be wiser to avoid invoking that situation (thus forcing the GM into a ruling, or all too often to simply deny the player the possibility of the action in question). Thus, players may limit their characters unnecessarily, simply because of mechanical limitations. Again, to use Dungeons & Dragons as an example, much is made of tactical combat - weapon choices, movement, spells and so forth are examined in some detail. Rules for feinting, however, are minimal and fall under the "Bluff" skill - taking an entire six seconds to feint with a rapier is unrealistic to any practitioners of the art in the "real world". Likewise, the idea that a weapon will do identical damage (on average) after a successful hit, whether the victim is wearing a cotton shirt or a set of full plate, does not hold up under scrutiny. It is, however, a tradition of that particular system, and so players work hard to increase Armor Class (AC) and Hit Points (HP), rather than relying on the protective qualities of armor to defend them by reducing inflicted damage.
Some of these points may be quibbles. It is a fact, however, that they directly impact a player's reasoning when making choices that affect his character. GMs who wish to maximize the scope of action for players must be conscious of these influences.
In short, a GM's experience must extend beyond what exists within the game world, and out into the larger scope of the rules by which action in that world is conducted. RPGs without rules are simply consentual storytelling; and although some players may be amenable to this style of play, most play groups require some minimal mechanics in order to proceed. These mechanics are as important as any story considerations, plotting or "pure roleplay" performed by the group.
There is another field in which experience will benefit a GM, but one that does not apply itself equally (or at all) to all GMs. It is, however, a pet peeve of mine, and as the pulpit is mine for the moment, I will make use of it.
Many gamemasters will try to twist an existing set of rules - Dungeons&Dragons being the most common, but other systems as well - into a setting, or mode of gaming, for which it is not well suited. Sometimes the publishing company itself will issue supplements or official rulings to this effect (Spelljammer comes to mind); other times, in-house modifications to existing rules are made.
I would like to offer my definition for what a "good" game system is.
<blockquote>A good game system is one which requires a minimal amount of rules modification to satisfy a maximum number of players and gamemasters.</blockquote>
This is a statistically verifiable measure. Many game systems - Amber, Shadowrun, Call of Cthulhu, and so forth - are optimized for one environment, one gameworld. These game systems have their adherents, and rightly so - if that is the only mode of gaming the play group enjoys.
Other game systems make certain mechanical assumptions about the world and about game play which make it difficult to adopt or justify those systems to uses other than they were intended. I will use Dungeons & Dragons as an example, but many other candidates exist.
D&D is founded on a simple premise: fantasy roleplaying with an emphasis on tactical, detailed combat between small numbers of participants. To that end it has section after section of detailed combat rules, movement and attack modifiers, spell listings with sharply-defined areas of effect and casting times, and so on. Advancement is provided by defeating monsters; enough "experience points", and a character gains an "experience level", making them more physically able, as well as competent in other ways (increased availability of spells, unique special abilities and the like).
Compare this to another game - Vampire: the Masquerade, published by White Wolf. Its premise is a little more detailed but can be summarized as: roleplaying in a modern setting with supernatural elements, most notably vampires, which the PCs are cast as. While Vampire includes a comprehensive list of combat rules, it deals with other elements as well: the onset of insanity, the various virtues (compassion, courage and so forth) and their impact on a character's actions, and political actions between vampires. It focuses as much on social as physical confrontations.
Both games, within their sphere, are well thought out and will serve their players and GMs, if the modes of play are agreeable to the group as a whole. However, what if a play group wishes (for example) to play out a small group of courtiers in a historical or fantasy setting? Such characters will be ill-suited for any sort of combative role, and combat will occur almost never - instead, diplomatic dealings and social maneuvering will be the order of the day. Is D&D the logical game system for such a campaign? Probably not, at least without modification.
It is at this point that a GM faces a choice - is the set of rules he's using (or familiar with) the proper one for the game he intends to run? And if not, is there another set of rules out there more applicable? Experience with a variety of game systems proves useful here. And if he intends to stick with his current set, what modifications will he be required to make? It is at this point that a GM can truly measure the worth of the system he is endeavoring to use.
Further, wide familiarity with gaming systems in use benefit a GM who does not use such systems as the prime mechanical foundation for his game - if a ruling which a GM must make has already been sensibly made and thoroughly playtested in an established system not his own, the wise GM will not seek to re-invent the wheel if that ruling can be adapted to his current game.
Players, too, will base many of their own actions (both "in character" and as themselves) based on the mechanics available. If no ruling exists for a situation, many players reason, it would be wiser to avoid invoking that situation (thus forcing the GM into a ruling, or all too often to simply deny the player the possibility of the action in question). Thus, players may limit their characters unnecessarily, simply because of mechanical limitations. Again, to use Dungeons & Dragons as an example, much is made of tactical combat - weapon choices, movement, spells and so forth are examined in some detail. Rules for feinting, however, are minimal and fall under the "Bluff" skill - taking an entire six seconds to feint with a rapier is unrealistic to any practitioners of the art in the "real world". Likewise, the idea that a weapon will do identical damage (on average) after a successful hit, whether the victim is wearing a cotton shirt or a set of full plate, does not hold up under scrutiny. It is, however, a tradition of that particular system, and so players work hard to increase Armor Class (AC) and Hit Points (HP), rather than relying on the protective qualities of armor to defend them by reducing inflicted damage.
Some of these points may be quibbles. It is a fact, however, that they directly impact a player's reasoning when making choices that affect his character. GMs who wish to maximize the scope of action for players must be conscious of these influences.
In short, a GM's experience must extend beyond what exists within the game world, and out into the larger scope of the rules by which action in that world is conducted. RPGs without rules are simply consentual storytelling; and although some players may be amenable to this style of play, most play groups require some minimal mechanics in order to proceed. These mechanics are as important as any story considerations, plotting or "pure roleplay" performed by the group.
- Printer-friendly version
- Login to post comments
