Home
Gallery
Register
Log in
Heavenforum, you have eaten my inspired and brilliant post for the last time!!
Right. So, a *paraphrase* of the last post I attempted to make follows:
In running a game, the job of the Storyguide, as I see it, is first and foremost to find a balance between styles of gaming. For instance, I am an abstract gamer - I prefer to play games without the constraint of stats and objective measures. I don't consider most RPGs and LARPs to be competitive systems, and I don't like to game as if they are.
When you run a game in which I am a player, you will know this because at some point, you'll say "what's your stat in X?" and I will rummage around in my brassiere to try to find which bosom my character sheet is stuffed under, and I will probably reply: "I haven't a clue." I prefer to play in a system where you don't need a character sheet or stats. I prefer to use a method of play wherein it doesn't matter if you succeed or fail at an action, because there are plenty of good roleplaying opportunities regardless of the outcome. I prefer acting to stats-comparisons.
This is why sometimes I say things like: "It doesn't matter. Play through." I don't mean to be dismissive, and for the players out there who prefer objective systems where X situation always results in Y, I am a very frustrating Storyguide.
I recognise this about myself and I try to be accommodating to gamers who prefer concrete systems and methods of play.
Some famous guy quoted some other not-so-famous guy who said something like "You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time". The more famous guy is attributed with saying something more like "You can't please all of the people all of the time, but you can please some of the people some of the time.". Or something. The point of that rambliness is that I do try to take a Utilitarian view of running a game.
Which is to say, I try not to let my own ego come in to play too much. I don't tend to run games...I try not to run games solely for the purpose of getting a sense of being in charge or of being in control. I *think* I run games because I want people to have fun. And when you're having fun, chances are good that I, also, am having fun. When I say I try to take a Utilitarian view of things in running games, I mean I try to make the game as pleasurable as possible for as many people as possible.
That being said, there does have to come a time when, in being a Storyguide, you have to act as an arbiter. I have to decide not only what is 'fair' for the players involved, but also what is 'fair' for the story. I don't like to stifle creativity; I would prefer to channel it...and that's why sometimes I say things like "I like your idea, and I'm not sure how it will fit in with the game currently...can we work on it together a bit?" Or, more likely, "that's a neat idea; have you considered W?"
In a conversation I had recently, it was pointed out to me (and I wholeheartedly agree) that as a Storyguide, you kind of have to be a bit of a benevolent dictator. And hopefully, as your resident benevolent dictator, this game is being hosted in a fashion that results in your having fun. If it doesn't, I do encourage you to talk to me about it. I might not say what you want to hear, and I might not share your opinion, but I'm running this game for you. I want you to have fun. And if that means I have to make some concessions on my part for different styles of play, I hope I'm doing that. I hope I'm getting better at trying to see things from your perspective.
Please have patience with me, because I'm still learning what it means to be a good Storyguide and a good host.
(Dave: no, you can't have those extra 20 Creation Zeal, but please don't think that means you should stop talking Canoe.)
Right. So, a *paraphrase* of the last post I attempted to make follows:
In running a game, the job of the Storyguide, as I see it, is first and foremost to find a balance between styles of gaming. For instance, I am an abstract gamer - I prefer to play games without the constraint of stats and objective measures. I don't consider most RPGs and LARPs to be competitive systems, and I don't like to game as if they are.
When you run a game in which I am a player, you will know this because at some point, you'll say "what's your stat in X?" and I will rummage around in my brassiere to try to find which bosom my character sheet is stuffed under, and I will probably reply: "I haven't a clue." I prefer to play in a system where you don't need a character sheet or stats. I prefer to use a method of play wherein it doesn't matter if you succeed or fail at an action, because there are plenty of good roleplaying opportunities regardless of the outcome. I prefer acting to stats-comparisons.
This is why sometimes I say things like: "It doesn't matter. Play through." I don't mean to be dismissive, and for the players out there who prefer objective systems where X situation always results in Y, I am a very frustrating Storyguide.
I recognise this about myself and I try to be accommodating to gamers who prefer concrete systems and methods of play.
Some famous guy quoted some other not-so-famous guy who said something like "You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time". The more famous guy is attributed with saying something more like "You can't please all of the people all of the time, but you can please some of the people some of the time.". Or something. The point of that rambliness is that I do try to take a Utilitarian view of running a game.
Which is to say, I try not to let my own ego come in to play too much. I don't tend to run games...I try not to run games solely for the purpose of getting a sense of being in charge or of being in control. I *think* I run games because I want people to have fun. And when you're having fun, chances are good that I, also, am having fun. When I say I try to take a Utilitarian view of things in running games, I mean I try to make the game as pleasurable as possible for as many people as possible.
That being said, there does have to come a time when, in being a Storyguide, you have to act as an arbiter. I have to decide not only what is 'fair' for the players involved, but also what is 'fair' for the story. I don't like to stifle creativity; I would prefer to channel it...and that's why sometimes I say things like "I like your idea, and I'm not sure how it will fit in with the game currently...can we work on it together a bit?" Or, more likely, "that's a neat idea; have you considered W?"
In a conversation I had recently, it was pointed out to me (and I wholeheartedly agree) that as a Storyguide, you kind of have to be a bit of a benevolent dictator. And hopefully, as your resident benevolent dictator, this game is being hosted in a fashion that results in your having fun. If it doesn't, I do encourage you to talk to me about it. I might not say what you want to hear, and I might not share your opinion, but I'm running this game for you. I want you to have fun. And if that means I have to make some concessions on my part for different styles of play, I hope I'm doing that. I hope I'm getting better at trying to see things from your perspective.
Please have patience with me, because I'm still learning what it means to be a good Storyguide and a good host.
(Dave: no, you can't have those extra 20 Creation Zeal, but please don't think that means you should stop talking Canoe.)
Last edited by cenobyte on Tue 27 Jan 2009 - 21:28; edited 1 time in total
» Magic Creation-Zeal Table
» Houses of the Blooded in Regina, August 28th
» The Sentinel's journal
» Character backgrounds
» The dreams of Edward
» Some of Eliel's secrets
» Question/June Game
» "Map" of the Fallen