Lamentations of the Flame Princess: my job as GM
David Berg:
Give the players the power and responsibility to skip over stuff that won't be fun to play through. Remind them of this. Boom! Pacing that doesn't require GM management.
Dunno if LotFP's rules preclude that, though. If it's like most of the D&D I played, I imagine there's a large and undefined gap between "what you roll dice for" and "what's worth playing through".
stefoid:
Quote from: Eero Tuovinen on November 08, 2011, 09:03:36 PM
This is interesting to read, do continue reporting on your game. I've been meaning to write about our campaign for ages as well, but seem to never get around to it. Probably something to do with being insanely busy with big conventions and publications.
And indeed, my experience is that one of the key ways my own, pretty hardcore sandbox OSR D&D differs from your bog-standard narrativist game with dramatic coordination is that pacing responsibilities are on the players, not on the GM: as the GM your job is merely to entertain yourself, provide organic setting/situation (barf forth dungeonstuff as someone might say) and referee whatever it is that the players get up to. Whether what they get up to is three hours of bickering over supplies followed by one random encounter, or an efficient delve that accomplishes many encounters, several fights and plentiful treasure, that's definitely up to the players and how they run their party interactions, planning and execution. Last Wednesday we saw the players flub their pacing, and consequently we only ever had time to taste their actual goal before having to stop for the night; last Sunday the players were motivated and aware of the dangers of failed pacing, and thus they were effective in not only executing (and failing in) their Wednesday plan, but they also deviced and executed an unrelated plan, ending up with 11,000 fantasy-Roman sestertius and 4000 talents - a veritable fortune. Players succeeding in pacing is what makes all the difference.
Thinking about it, perhaps one reason I don't have time for session reportage is that we actually played three sessions last week. Heh.
Nobody bickers over supplies for three hours unless they have GM1.
JasperN.:
While I agree that it´s a good idea to place pacing in the hands of the players and actively free oneself from a burn-out-producing GM mindset, I´d argue that I as a GM would find it boring to watch the other players divy up their treasure for an hour. I mean, I wouldn´t have treasure to divy up, so, effectively, I´d be pushed out of the game. The only time I can add ideas to the game is when the characters are actually doing something, and thus I´d rather nudge my players into situations where I´d get a chance to play, too. Vincent, in your opening posting you make it sound like stepping back from being responsible for pacing is some kind of liberation, and I guess in a way it is, simply because it´s an outcome of the realization that you, as a GM, are not, in fact, the sole provider of fun/action at the table. The rules should contribute. The other players should contribute. Okay, but getting to the interesting situations in play is something I´d press (regardless of whether I´m a player of GM), simply because it´s more rewarding for me - not becauseI feel I have to entertain everyone, but because I feel everyone should entertain me. It´s one of the major reasons why I, as a GM, skip shopping, uneventful travelling etc. and rather be like: "Yeah, yeah, you kinda have the usual stuff you need for the task at hand, it cost you reasonable amounts of money, and you got to X more or less in one piece." I find these parts of play boring, because I can add very little as a GM and they´re boring to watch as a GM-spectator ("5 gold ...mumble, mumble ...oh, and let´s have a shovel, don´t forget the shovel ... is it gonna rain?...") I wanna get players to a point where I can do stuff, too, and see what they come up with as a reaction. If I have to sit back and just watch others do stuff, it´d better be something good. Funny, I´ve never seen this about my GMing til now. Do I rob players of something by fast-forwarding to what to me are the interesting parts? I always thought it was in their best interest and now I see that, honestly, it´s in my best interest, first and foremost. Still not wrong, necessarily.
Frank Tarcikowski:
Hey Jasper, I guess this is something people like you and me just have to take at face value.
OSR guy: And the great thing about it, if something interesting happens we’ll know it’s not because the GM wanted it to happen, it just happened, you know?
Jasper + me: Dude, wtf?
But hey. In a slightly different context, someone once said, [this kind of role-playing] writes stories like football does, and I guess that’s right. Still not my cup of tea, but I guess I kinda sorta get what they like about it. Maybe.
I loved the spider, though. Did you come up with that on the spot, Vincent?
- Frank
lumpley:
Uh. No seriously guys, I disclaim responsibility for the game's pacing. Advice for how I can better pace the game, or worries about how the game's pacing might go poorly, are plain misplaced. It's not my job!
My job does include setting and holding standards for when we roll dice and use other rules, and those standards do affect the game's pacing, but I'm not taking pacing into account as I set and hold them. Frank's right: the game's narrative comes out of play, a result or even a byproduct. It's not a concern of play. Same as for football or Chess or any other normal game. It feels weird, but I'm pretty sure that'll go away with familiarity. No fixing required.
Frank, yeah, I came up with the spider on the spot. I've primed myself really well - it's just me doing my Vance impersonation. Thanks!
-Vincent
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page