GM's teach the players how to play in their game
Ron Edwards:
That's a fair point, and I'm happy to include it in my argument. In fact, I think it already has a nice niche waiting for it, as a subset of my second point.
I did mentioning reading the rules, but I did not say, nor did I mean to imply, that the person who read the rules teaches only those things to the others. For our hobby in particular, and here again, I'm agreeing with you, that would be a very inaccurate claim.
Best, Ron
JEY:
Well, what i've understand was that the players learn the "style" of game (I don't know if there is an term for it exactly) that the GM plays
so, I think 2 things about it:
First: this wouldn't happen, the GM should make clear what kind of game he intent to play, and don't let the players dicover it during the game. I Played last month an D&D adventure, which the GM awarned: "this scenario isn't designed for play, it's super-hyper-very-ultra hard, and You probably will loose a couple of characters during play". I Played and I didn't liked, but wasn't his fault, couse he warned us.
Second: this wouldn't happen, couse, if the stories are always the same, between systems and games, maybe the GM should see some different movies or play a little, unless the players DO WANT to have the certainty that the cute girl in the dungeon is going to be to Great demon.
by the way, hi, its my first post o/
oculusverit:
That was a really great summing up of the matter, in my opinion!
So to go with both what JEY's second point was, and Ron's point that the GM is of course another player in every game, then the way I see it, if the traditional idea is in play where the players are playing "against" the GM then if the GM wants to be a better player, he needs to switch up his strategies and cultivate some versatility (i.e., what JEY said about going to see different movies or playing in someone else's game). Otherwise, once I've "learned" that GM's game, I'm going to be bored. Others, though, might just feel some comfort about the whole thing and remain for the sake of familiarity.
Ron Edwards:
Hello,
It's now time to turn this into a real Actual Play thread. So far, we have been batting claims and abstractions back and forth, and this thread is not up to the standards of the site.
To "dugfromthe earth" (please consider providing your first name; handles are no good for actual discussions), check out the sticky thread at the top of the Actual Play forum. You need to provide some account of play or interaction about play which grounds your post. My point #1, addressed directly to you, sought this information. I am now upgrading it to a moderator statement. Without an account of real-world play or real-world interaction about real-world play which informs us as to why this question matters, then the thread must be closed.
Best, Ron
dugfromthearth:
my first name is Doug
I've had this come up twice in the past year in different groups. Three of us play together in two games, with different others filling out those groups.
In one we were playing Dark Heresy. It was in theory an investigation, but it turned out that talking to people did no good. Reporting to our bosses did not good. We had to complete the adventure by us fighting the really tough bad guys. That wasn't supposed to be our role, but the GM ends every adventure that way. I mentioned to the other players that the GM teaches you how to play in their game. We'd played with him before, so I knew that trying to solve the adventure with non-combat skills was pointless. And I knew to make a character who was focused on combat, not on investigating. The other players got very upset that I would say that the GM teaches you how to play the game. I may have worded it badly - but they got so upset they wouldn't even let me explain.
We were just recently playing a Shadowrun game with another GM. As we are thinking of what to do and discussing it, the GM kept making comments. He was basically telling us our ideas would not work. And he was suggesting we try certain things. It was very annoying because he was basically telling us what to do. We were trying to roleplay but it was hard to ignore the GM (who was speaking through an NPC) telling us what would and wouldn't work. When I suggested to the other players that we should pay attention to the GM they got upset. So what was supposed to be wrapped up in one session has dragged on for 4 with no end in sight.
Both games are supposed to be player driven investigations/capers. Lots of room to try different things. But in both cases the GM determined what would work. You didn't have to figure out what would work within the rules, you had to figure out what the GM would let work.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page