How long have you been Role Playing?
That's been a while. Can't tell you the very first roleplay I was part of, but it started becoming a regular thing April 2008
About how long did your Role play before you started Gming?
Not too long actually. The IC of my first game was posted in September the same year, on rpgateway.
What made you decide to take up the mantle of GM?
Same story as everyone else, really. You got an idea you want to act out and share with other people. That is roughly how every GM starts out, isn't it?
So what do you feel is your most successful RP to date?
That's really something that ain't that easy to just say. I mean, what's successful? What I see as a successful game is an RP in which everyone is enjoying their selves. Now I'm getting a lot of good feedback on the game I'm running now (technically co-GM'ing with a lazy bastard called Rilla) so I think in that sense, the Library so far is a very successful. On the other I've also ran some completely different games.
The Library has a huge focus on action and adventure, exotic settings, giant monsters and superpowers, you name it. Now when we compare it to another game I ran, the Alluring, was a slower-paced RP that relied much more heavily on plot and character choices. People had a lot more power per post and the feel of the game was naturally completely different. There were a lot of detective and drama elements brought in. When we finished the Alluring, I also got some great feedback from the remaining players.
So which is more successful? Can't tell, because measuring how much fun different people have doing different things is pretty much impossible.
So was there a RP you learned the most from as a GM? One that really helped you firm-up your techniques as a GM?
It's more of a process than seperate lessons, honestly. You never stop learning. On the one hand, I could say it's my first RP, because that one died and my second game (Sandcastle, hosted on your very own roleplayerguild) we finished. Although the degree to which my first RP failed is rivalled by, ironically, the sequel to Sandcastle. Ever since my games have been pretty consistent.
On the other hand, most of my experiments (I experiment in my RP's a lot) were performed in the Alluring and to a lesser extent; Brave. By testing different elements and approaches, then gathering the feedback I like to think I learned a lot of things that I'm currently applying to the Library. It would never have been as 'good' if those two hadn't existed.
It’s really something about what you feel is more important. The basics or the more 'advanced' elements. On a site like the guild or gateway, where a ton of games die prematurely, the basics are something that are very uncommon. So anyone mastering these basics is, by our standards, inherently a good GM and being much better won't get you that much more players.
Now, if we take an environment where lots of games survive, it won't matter if I know the basics or not if I put up a game there, I'll need to make sure it's better than other people their games. Or at least covers a niché, so that people want to play it. So which lessons were more important depends on what environment you're in.
Do you plot out your RP's or leave them open ended?
To certain ends. It's good to have a sense of direction, but plotting every step along the way, something I like to call the Shon Harris-approach (
hi Shon,) is something that really doesn't work for me.
See I create games I would join. I wouldn't join a game where my actions were pre-determined. So I tend to stick to having an abstract objective in mind, but try to remain open-minded about how this objective can be reached. It does require the players and GM to strike a bit of a balance, which isn't always easy, but when it does work out; people feel their posts are influencing the course of the RP. That's a philosophy I like to see in other GM's.
You mentioned creating games you would want to play. Do you play in your games, i.e. do you tend to run GM-PC's and take part of the Game or stick with NPC's?
In most games I ran I had GMPC's, but you can easily do without. The tricky thing about GMPC's is that you want to avoid having your GMPC compete with other PC's. That's a bitch, especially for someone like me who likes to play characters that bring a lot of antagonism to the table. So most of the time, if I do use a character they play a more passive role in the RP.
Whether I'm using a character or not depends on if I
want to use one. I mean hey, collaboration is good and all but it's my game too! Still. Strictly speaking, if I were to advice someone on what is best to do on a
technical level I'd say stick with NPC's.
How do you handle drop-outs and vanishing acts?
Depends if their vanishing act needs to be explained in order for other people to continue the RP. If they don't need to, I tend to ignore it altogether. Otherwise; preferably murder them in the most brutal way possible. A love my co-GM Rilla shares. We have been one-upping each other by murdering drop-out characters. Although I must say he dropped the ball on the latest one. Shame on you, Rilla!
But honestly, pretty much in a way I see fit. If I desperately need the character or like them so much I want to use them as NPC's, I'll do that. Although I also don't mind throwing in a plot twist by killing off an important character. Because hey, having no strict plot leaves you with a ton of freedom! But yeah as I said earlier, most of the time it's ignoring them or making them go out with fireworks.
Well in that vein, what was your favorite PC death as a result?
Well, that one dates back a while. It was in Sandcastle's sequel. Sarzu(m) had told me he wasn't going to continue the game, so I decided to use his character to introduce a new antagonist. As it turned out, his character was pinned down, had a shitload of bugs and birds pushed down his throat that ate him from the inside out. Needless to say I had a stupid grin on my face all the time I was writing it. Thanks, Sarzu!
How selective are you about people joining your RPs? Do you limit the number, do pick based on CS or first come first served?
Honestly depends on the game. As mentioned before I run a good variety of them. Let's pick these things apart. First, numbers.
I used to go by the golden eight player rule, but the thing is, you don't want eight characters in the same place at the same time. You've been in advanced games, I'm sure you know how it is. We have a posting round, we see eight posts, usually at least around thousand words long, but the only real progress is made at the first post every cycle. I don't know about you, but for me that just doesn't work. There is too much information and too little action going on. Nobody pushes the game forward because they'd end up godmoding the others if they did, because they don't have the time to react. This just doesn't work. So instead you want less people at the same place at the same time.
Now you can do this two ways. Either you limit your number of players and work with that. I believe Genkai is a very vocal fan of this. The pro's to this are that you can have everyone interact with each other and form a more coherent group as the game progresses. Another major advantage is that if characters play important roles, they will be able to shine more easily when you have a small number of players.The big downside to this is that... Players drop. A lot. Recruiting for a running game is always harder than for a game you're just starting up. So every replacement you're gonna need will be harder to find. What makes it worse is having to turn down players because you've reached capacity, further limiting your pool of potential RP'rs.
The second way to do this is to just have that big group of players and split them up into small groups. That's what Rilla and I are doing in the Library. You still have the same advantages in terms of progression per post (cycle,) although due to forming different groups per mission, you might lose a few points on the group-feeling of the characters. The major plus to this however is, you are much, much better equipped to play the inevitable numbers-game. Because you have a larger pool of people, a few of them dropping isn't as big a deal because you can reform groups at the next mission anyway. We can also take in new players all the time, just add them to a mission. I mean the optimal number is probably three players per situation, excluding the GM. A fourth really doesn't hurt that much. And if there's multiple people joining, just spread them over the missions.
As for who joins... Most people who apply to my games get in, sometimes with an edit or two. I am very careful with my interest checks; I make sure I know exactly what I'm selling and to who. So I know the type of people that join my games and what they expect. The interest checks work very well too, Brovo even refers to it in his GM-guidelines article.
Also, I don't take twenty interviews only to turn down twelve of them. I really can't politely answer why I don't run those kinds of policies, so I won't.
How do you typically handle trouble players?
You know the funny thing is I never had to kick someone from a game. Decline a character sheet, yeah I did that. I don’t accept things that aren’t up to 'standards,' which usually means game-breaking or out of synch with the world, but I do give people a lot of room to improve it, which sometimes... Ends up with "Hey dude thanks for the interest, but I really don't think we're the kind of RP you're looking for. Sorry about the effort, but I'm going to decline your character sheet. Best of luck finding another game!"
I've not yet had te decline a sheet because of the person submitting their selves was trouble. Which is probably because most people who I dislike on a personal level stay the hell away from me by their own accord and those often are persons that cause trouble and inter-player conflicts.
How do you handle inter-player conflicts?
Haha that’s nasty nasty, nasty question. See the problem is, people only have conflicts at the times I’m sleeping, in school or out. Never when I'm online. So it usually escalates before I even see it.
Either way, I prefer to cut things clean ASAP. Inter-player conflicts you see, are destructive to games. Last conflict we had was about a game-mechanic a player couldn't throw her full support behind, whereas other players defended the mechanic. Now the thing is, this wasn't really something we could resolve by argumenting perspectives; we plain disagreed. Which kinda went downhill.
I ended it with well... A climax, although technically speaking a conflict was no longer going on, I made a post about how I don't want things like certain comments in my games. Then I PM'd both parties seperately, giving it some afterthought and explaining shortly why I did what I did. It was a little over the top, but I wanted the situation to be clear with everyone. As a result nobody left and both parties continued playing without further issue.
Although I do have to give everyone involved credit for that. Usually at least one person leaves because of a conflict, or begins to harbour some kind of grudge. But not here. So in that I believe my players to be great sports.
How do you balance out Character screen time? Do you try to give each player equal time to shine or do you base it on how much they are putting into the RP?
The first thing I make sure of is that a game can continue if someone drops. A lot of people will disagree with this, but if your character is irreplaceable you are a danger to the RP. When we can make sure of that I typically let people fend for their selves. I give everyone opportunities, but I'm not just going to give them the spotlight. I might give a little more or a little less depending on the person, but... People are really gonna have to take it for their selves.
How many opportunities you give people will typically depend on the RP and how they respond to them. If your RP needs to be very character-driven, you are pretty much waiting for someone to take initiative. So you give a lot of opportunities. A more event-based game, you typically don't.
At the same time you have players that are leaders and followers, and followers who want to be leaders. This is pretty much about striking a balance. If a person is too loud, hand their character a little less opportunity or make them work harder for it. If someone is shy, throw them a couple bones. If they react you know they want to give it a shot, if they don't you leave them be.
Never just say “This arc is about you!” because that's asking for trouble. GM's should give opportunities, but never the spotlight itself.
So which do you like better, RPing or GMing?
The issue with that is that everything I don't GM myself dies. There's only a handful longstanding games I've been in that weren't my own. In that sense, I see myself more as an emergency leader, you know? If shit starts falling apart I jump in and take the reins, but I prefer having good leadership I can support. It's... well, easier, therefore more befitting of a way to spend my free time.
So I guess that in that perspective I prefer RP'ing, but honestly I have a lot of fun with GM'ing too and those games are the ones that last and evolve; ultimately making them a better experience. Of the games I didn’t run there's only one that's still going on. Although this one has like 1-2 months interval per post nowadays, we've been at it for years. It's pretty awesome, everyone is so relaxed about it.
What advice would you give to a new GM starting out, tricks, tips etc. Something you wish you had known at the beginning?
Well that's two questions in a way, but I answered Brovo a similar question when he was making his gm article. This would be my advice;
You're going to fail.
I'm not even kidding. GM'ing is like a lot of things in life are; you can read dozens of books about it but you're not gonna get good at it until you get some experience under your belt. People are fickle creatures and there's little room for mistakes while managing them. Or not managing them, for that matter. You're going to need to find your audience and you're going to need to find your style. You're going to experiment, see what does and doesn't work for you. So don't be afraid to fail, but make sure you learn from your mistakes when you do.
As for what I wish I would have known; I learn best by falling flat on my face and standing up again. Realising mistakes and analyzing the things I run into. I think that my ability as a GM would have been hindered greatly if someone had taken me by the hand and taught me things instead of me trying to find my own way. That's pretty much the core of my advice too; find your own style and way. Don't be afraid to experiment but by all means, don't try to be something you're not.
Moderator
Originally Posted by Sophistikit
Posting Permissions
