So last nights game I GMed petered out a bit early when I basically admitted 'I got nuthin'. GMing by improvisation is a skill I am still learning, and whilst the session before was good, this session was not. There were factors - circumstances conspired to rob me of any time to prep the session, even by refreshing myself about my notes, so I went in cold. Plus I was kinda tapped out from being in meetings all day at work.
Now I know about the concept of bangs. I was sitting there thinking, hmm, what I need to do right now is drop a bang on these guys. But what? I couldnt think of anything that wouldnt seem lame and contrived. I tried writing down a list of the unanswered questions that had been raised by play so far, and stared at it for a while, whilst the players talked about non-game stuff. I couldnt think of anything coherent to answer those questions right then on the spot.
Still, I feel that there must be some kind of best practices that a an improvising GM can fall back on in these situations. What are your thoughts? What do you successful improvising GMs do when you you come to the realization that you have absolutely no idea what happens next?
Hi Steve,
What game are we talking about? What sort of improvisation: about little things, big things, everything, or what?
Best, Ron
Uh, not to shortcut Ron's questions, which I'd like to know the answers to as well, but here is a one-liner I just needed to get out:
Quote from: stefoid on March 11, 2011, 07:12:08 AM
I feel that there must be some kind of best practices that a an improvising GM can fall back on in these situations.
There is. It is called "toilet break".
One more remark. I've tried to run games after a long day at work and it's really hard. I work in a job where I mostly get paid for using my brain, and after some 10 hours at the office I tend to feel too drained to do anything that requires creativity. Sad but true!
- Frank
Quote from: stefoid on March 11, 2011, 07:12:08 AM
Still, I feel that there must be some kind of best practices that a an improvising GM can fall back on in these situations. What are your thoughts? What do you successful improvising GMs do when you you come to the realization that you have absolutely no idea what happens next?
In ye olden days I would either fall back in character histories or consequences to character actions.
Nowdays, with Burning Wheel I think about consequences to their actions and look at their Beliefs and Instincts, relationships and such. Hopefully, that will be enough to inspire me. If not, we need to stop the game and re-write some Beliefs.
With Apocalypse World, I look at the moves, at the Fronts and Threats and go from there. I think about NPC's who might feel threatened, might feel that their resources or livelihoods are being stepped out by the PC's and what they might do about it.
QuoteStill, I feel that there must be some kind of best practices that a an improvising GM can fall back on in these situations. What are your thoughts?
So, there's a simple trick I do if a game doesn't support me already: I write down the major NPCs and write a motivation or two for them.
During play, I simply go down the list and ask myself, "Who would do something interesting? What would their response be to (previous action)?" Then I start a scene either with it about to happen, in the middle of happening, or the after effects.
In this way, you simply end up playing your NPCs the same way a player plays their PC- you don't have to pre-plan a lot- you just play the characters, picking the ones who you think would have the most relevant actions to hit the situation.
The one trick to this is that you have to have decent motivations and realize that an NPC could go about things in a LOT of ways.
An enemy need not always ambush the party- maybe they decide to see if they could bribe the PCs or cut a deal. An ally might withhold aid, or demand conditions, "You just let that village burn after you were done fighting. We're going back and helping those people. Yes, it'll take a days. But then, and only then, will I show you the path to the Lost Citadel" etc.
Also be willing to change a motivation based on things that happen. And in this way the NPCs become more fleshed out and interesting.
Chris
Quote from: Chris_Chinn on March 11, 2011, 01:48:27 PM
QuoteStill, I feel that there must be some kind of best practices that a an improvising GM can fall back on in these situations. What are your thoughts?
So, there's a simple trick I do if a game doesn't support me already: I write down the major NPCs and write a motivation or two for them.
During play, I simply go down the list and ask myself, "Who would do something interesting? What would their response be to (previous action)?" Then I start a scene either with it about to happen, in the middle of happening, or the after effects.
In this way, you simply end up playing your NPCs the same way a player plays their PC- you don't have to pre-plan a lot- you just play the characters, picking the ones who you think would have the most relevant actions to hit the situation.
The one trick to this is that you have to have decent motivations and realize that an NPC could go about things in a LOT of ways.
An enemy need not always ambush the party- maybe they decide to see if they could bribe the PCs or cut a deal. An ally might withhold aid, or demand conditions, "You just let that village burn after you were done fighting. We're going back and helping those people. Yes, it'll take a days. But then, and only then, will I show you the path to the Lost Citadel" etc.
Also be willing to change a motivation based on things that happen. And in this way the NPCs become more fleshed out and interesting.
Chris
Youre right -- nothing happens unless someone wants it to happen, right? unless its a natural disaster or something.
Its what I should have prepped, but didnt have time for, and in this instance I had a blank. I knew the antagonist wanted a certain PC and that PC managed to be drugged and captured and taken away. At the point where the captor was to confront the captive, I had to admit that it would be best to close the session prematurely, because I had absolutely no reason worked out behind the antagonists actions.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on March 11, 2011, 09:19:31 AM
Hi Steve,
What game are we talking about? What sort of improvisation: about little things, big things, everything, or what?
Best, Ron
Hi.
My own game in progress. https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B5W32IfgIIkrYWI5OGNkYzQtMzQwNS00ZWFhLWE4MmYtMDM0NmMwM2Q0N2Vi&sort=name&layout=list&num=50 (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B5W32IfgIIkrYWI5OGNkYzQtMzQwNS00ZWFhLWE4MmYtMDM0NmMwM2Q0N2Vi&sort=name&layout=list&num=50)
Big things. I was entirely at sea. I expected that even coming to the session cold, that Id be able to come up with what I needed to on the fly, and fill in the backstory retrospectively on the fly. <sound of failure buzzer>
Gah, and probably mucked up the little things as well. Actually I broke my own rule from my doco and indulged in some pointless railroading to compound the problem.
See, in the previous session the badguys (for whatever reason I havent worked out yet) attempted to capture the man with mark of Hermes (PC) and there was a fight and they were unsuccessful. The PCs then went to a 'friend' in authority's place for help, and he betrayed them. Rather than have a struggle here, I decided on the spur of the moment that two similar situations, 'thugs attempt capture and there is a fight', would be boring, so their gracious host drugged their wine and they awoke to find the kidnapping was a done deal. Highly undramatic.
Guys, stop! None of us has any idea what is even meant by improvisation in the opening post. Let's settle this down into very practical, local terms for that exact game and group, and not some vague associations among a variety of games.
Best, Ron
Fuck! Ignore that post. I missed the link. Carry on.
Best, Ron
Well, maybe turn it around. If your plan is to improvise, what prep do you do to avoid shooting blanks?
I think Chris's suggestion is probably the most important that I can think of - identify the major NPCs and what they want.
Anything else?
Hi Steve,
I've gotten a chance to look at the rules you've linked, and luckily, you have some really strong tools in there that make it easier to improvise.
First, you've got the rules for players to freely suggest ideas, and use "Tell me more...". (Now, if the players -aren't- using these, you need to talk as a group, and maybe consider if a reward system around those rules would help. etc.) So players -should- be telling you what they're interested in and directing the story with those rules.
Second, you've got a broad range of PC motivations from the jump (I call these things "Flags"). Design your NPC motivations to clash or play on those in interesting ways. For example, an NPC might have a motivation which aligns with one player's belief, and challenges another. Or one that forces one or more players to have to choose sides about it, etc.
Third, and this is actually key: pay attention to what players spend Body & Soul on, especially if it's not about survival. That will tell you what the players' are interested in, the conflicts they absolutely don't want to lose.
I've been running and playing a lot of Primetime Adventures, in which characters have an Issue- a single phrase describing what their story is going to revolve around. But there's a trick I've seen during play- that one Issue is actually a broad direction- and play only gets real good when you narrow down the specific ways in which this player wants to explore this story about this thing.
For example, in one game a player had the Issue of "Where is the line of right and wrong in war? Can war ever be used to save lives?" - It was ok putting him into situations that were hard, but it became a great Issue when I started framing conflicts where he had people he cared about, including family, encouraging him to cross that line, over and over.
The trick to finding that out, though, was paying close attention to both his responses and body language at the table ("Oh, he's really liking/hating this!") and also when and where he'd spend the extra resources in game to make sure he'd win.
This sort of narrowing in on the bullseye, during play, is a crucial step that really makes games sing. When you can get that, the improv becomes a lot easier because each scene and conflict builds momentum - you find the conflicts and events become more and more important and loaded and the players become invested deeper - the group takes on direction and you follow their leads, only needing to nudge here and there.
Chris
Quote from: Chris_Chinn on March 12, 2011, 11:57:56 AM
Hi Steve,
I've gotten a chance to look at the rules you've linked, and luckily, you have some really strong tools in there that make it easier to improvise.
First, you've got the rules for players to freely suggest ideas, and use "Tell me more...". (Now, if the players -aren't- using these, you need to talk as a group, and maybe consider if a reward system around those rules would help. etc.) So players -should- be telling you what they're interested in and directing the story with those rules.
Second, you've got a broad range of PC motivations from the jump (I call these things "Flags"). Design your NPC motivations to clash or play on those in interesting ways. For example, an NPC might have a motivation which aligns with one player's belief, and challenges another. Or one that forces one or more players to have to choose sides about it, etc.
Third, and this is actually key: pay attention to what players spend Body & Soul on, especially if it's not about survival. That will tell you what the players' are interested in, the conflicts they absolutely don't want to lose.
I've been running and playing a lot of Primetime Adventures, in which characters have an Issue- a single phrase describing what their story is going to revolve around. But there's a trick I've seen during play- that one Issue is actually a broad direction- and play only gets real good when you narrow down the specific ways in which this player wants to explore this story about this thing.
For example, in one game a player had the Issue of "Where is the line of right and wrong in war? Can war ever be used to save lives?" - It was ok putting him into situations that were hard, but it became a great Issue when I started framing conflicts where he had people he cared about, including family, encouraging him to cross that line, over and over.
The trick to finding that out, though, was paying close attention to both his responses and body language at the table ("Oh, he's really liking/hating this!") and also when and where he'd spend the extra resources in game to make sure he'd win.
This sort of narrowing in on the bullseye, during play, is a crucial step that really makes games sing. When you can get that, the improv becomes a lot easier because each scene and conflict builds momentum - you find the conflicts and events become more and more important and loaded and the players become invested deeper - the group takes on direction and you follow their leads, only needing to nudge here and there.
Chris
Its very easy to come up with motivations (flags) that arent helpful. These were the first characters that were put together according to my rules and as a result, Ive added a lot more guidance type stuff about character flags. But yeah, these ones are a real mixed bag. Im gaining an appreciation for long lists of examples, which I havent added to my doco yet.
But yeah, concerning improvisation in general, your advice above is sound, and it comes back to prep I think. When you have 4 PCs with a collection of these flags and goals that you have to pay attention to, it becomes easy to loose track. My short term memory is not the best. As part of prep Im going to have to make a short list of character flags that I can leverage.
When I run out of material while DMing:
1. I poll the players for what they want their characters to do. It's a sandbox campaign, so it's really up to them. If they pursue something that I think I can run with, I keep going.
2. If I'm really running out of ideas, I call a 15 minute break. Usually I just close my eyes and nap. In the last 5 minutes I see if any ideas came to me. I'll extend the break 5-10 minutes if I think I can prep something worth running.
3. If I'm out of material and inspiration, I call an end to the game. It affects quality- gotta preserve quality. I'll prep more for next game.
Luckily in a sandbox game it seems like I don't waste much prep. If it doesn't get used in game X, luckily they seem to go to the area game Y, so occasionally when I run out of stuff they solve the problem for me accidentally.
That's just me. I find random encounters with improv is pretty cool sometimes.
Quote from: Natespank on March 12, 2011, 03:25:55 PM
When I run out of material while DMing:
1. I poll the players for what they want their characters to do. It's a sandbox campaign, so it's really up to them. If they pursue something that I think I can run with, I keep going.
Thats a good idea. In my game, the players can explicitly set short and long term goals. in practice, they can set these goals and follow them with varying degrees of intensity. The other night there wasnt a lot of energy devoted to doing either and I could have taken a poll as you suggest - what are your current goals, what are you doing about them, can you think of any new ones?
cheers
Steve,
I think that being creative, on your own, is actually quite difficult. (In Play Unsafe, I take a very positive tone, but doing it on your own is hard.)
Here are some circumstances that make it easier:
1. When everyone else is doing it too. That way, everyone's improvising, building on each other's ideas. Try to do it on your own, in a traditional GMing-a-scenario role, and it's difficult. It might work if...
2. There are strong genre expectations. For example, in Call of Cthulhu, when the Investigators ask an ally for help, he will get out some books to help them research. In Lacuna, the friend in authority is obviously a double agent. With strong genre expectations, you can improvise all day.
Further examples! As a GM, Poison'd is easy to improvise, because you simply set the players against each other. Lacuna is easy to GM in a different way, because of those genre expectations.
It sounds to me as though you were trying to improvise a plot, by yourself, in a weakly-defined setting. That is very difficult. It sounds, too, as though the plot was drifting long before you ran out of ideas: the thugs failed to capture the PCs, so they went to someone in authority...that sounds like a drifting plot, to me. So I suspect things went wrong before you ran out of ideas.
Can I ask you a question? Were you desperately trying to think of creative, amazing things to happen? (Your comment on Bangs makes it sound as though you were.) That is often a recipe for disaster. One of the main ideas, in Play Unsafe, is that you should be obvious.
Thus, if it's obvious a fight should happen, have a fight. (You can always cut straight to the end of the fight or something.) If it's obvious the friend-in-authority should betray them, then he should betray him; but if it's obvious he should help them, then he should help them.
What do you think? I hope some of that helps.
Hi Graham.
What do you mean by drifting plot? I mean, the 'plot' sure was drifting, but thats because it didnt exist. I was improvising, hoping to come up with stuff I could reintegrate at a later date that would make everything seem coherent. And yes, I was working almost alone in that regard. The two times players did make suggestions, I was el-stupido and hosed them because I couldnt see where they could possibly go. Even though I had nowhere to go anyway :(
Quote from: Graham W on March 14, 2011, 07:13:59 PM
Can I ask you a question? Were you desperately trying to think of creative, amazing things to happen? (Your comment on Bangs makes it sound as though you were.) That is often a recipe for disaster. One of the main ideas, in Play Unsafe, is that you should be obvious.
Actually I was keeping in my mind 'be obvious', having just read your text. The trouble was (it seemed to me at the time) that I was in danger of duplicating the previous conflict where thugs attempt to catch party member because they failed to the first time. And that would be lame and boring (it seemed to me at the time).
So in retrospect, yes I was trying to be less than obvious by not being repetitive, even though being repetitive in this situation was logical -- the thug-hirer hadnt (whoever the @#$@ that was) changed his desires, so would keep trying. So I tried 'switching it up' which in retrospect was a rubbish instinct - first of all I railroaded the players, which meant there was no conflict and no opportunity for them to find their own way out of the situation. 2nd of all, (and I just thought of this) had the players managed to capture one of the thugs, they could have interrogated him. I guess the problem with that scenario is that I had absolutely no idea what such a thug might say, since I didnt know why he was there in the first place.
If I had of prepped an antagonist with some motives, I could have happily had a captured thug advance the plot for them
Hi Steve,
I love improv GMing (most of the time), and have a long list of techniques that I somewhat haphazardly match to situations as they come up. Here are a few that I think might help with what you've described in this thread (my browser won't read your googledoc):
Let it RideQuote from: stefoid on March 14, 2011, 10:39:42 PMI was trying to be less than obvious by not being repetitive, even though being repetitive in this situation was logical
Instead of trouble-shooting that, make sure it doesn't come up in the first place! When the players escape capture the first time, the "Let it Ride" principle says that they stay uncaptured. For me, this means that I have to justify that during the initial escape. "As you get away, you see that the badguys dropped the device they've been using to find you. You can now mess with it and send them on wild goose chases."
Ask for a PlanThe best friend of "Tell me more", in my opinion. Getting the players to spell out what they intend to do allows you to ponder responses. Hearing what they think will work gives you material! If it makes sense to them, much of the time it should make sense to you too! Ask, "Are you taking any precautions to avoid X?" and then invent X as per their response!
As for the kidnapping, I might be reading into what was wrong with that in this game, but here are the three GM best practices that I would turn to in that situation:
Coercion Bad, Opportunities GoodI suck at improvising fun
demands on the players. "You
have to do this, or you die / the world ends / etc.!" What I find easier is to just fling random leads at character flags until something sticks. "Here, this might be a way toward getting something you want. And over here, there's another way. And over here, there's something for a different thing you want."
Storm WarningsIt's the converse of flinging opportunities the players can jump on or not; fling threats they can deal with or not. For example, give away the kidnappers' presence well before a fight is mandated. Does the player deal with them here and now, or elsewhere, later?
Signal ValueOf course, no one will jump at your opportunities until they know what they stand to gain by pursuing them! So try to signal that. Likewise for your threats -- broadcast why they need to be stopped/averted!
It sounds like you're leaning toward more prep to help with a lot of your problems. It sounds like you have some good ideas for that, but man, if your goal was to have a low-prep, improv-heavy game, I hope you go for
that!
Thanks Dave, I like those.
Do you think prepping a couple of antagonists and their motives is overly preppy? Still dont know what will happen, but sometimes I will know why.
I'm a big fan of knowing why! And yeah, I often use prep for that myself. I think it's possible to prep the barest basics, like a single word for a motive, and then flesh them out naturally in play with improv.
Giving the GM lists, tables or charts to roll on, or images to interpret, can be a prep time-saver. I have a list of connections ("destroys", "shows the way to", "amplifies", etc.) I occasionally roll on to link my elements to each other.
When your brain fails, use the player's brain. But don't let them know you are doing it.
You got any precise techniques for that, Ross?