Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>
Subject: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:22:26 +0100
Hi everybody...
I'm Obviously back from my far too long absence...
(my english is as bad as it was then)
So I have no idea if the topic I intend to bring up has been
discussed before, so don't be too hard...

The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

Thanks
ss (back at last)
Message no. 2
From: David Mezerette <mezeretted@*****.U-NANCY.FR>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:01:26 +0100
At 12:22 15/10/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Hi everybody...
>I'm Obviously back from my far too long absence...
>(my english is as bad as it was then)
>So I have no idea if the topic I intend to bring up has been
>discussed before, so don't be too hard...
>
>The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
>all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
>the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
>gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
>by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
>Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
>Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?
>
i'm the only shadowrun gm of my group, and each of us masterize usually only
2 or 3 different rpgs, so that it allows us to test a reasonnable amount of
game systems and worlds, and to have an extensive knowledge on the worlds we
masterize (yes, there's a life after game sessions..). Most of the gms i
know don't like having players play a character they've already played w/
another gm, even if they know him/her/it/them (??) very well, because u
could never know what the other gm has planned for this character

ChYlD
mezerette@*****.u-nancy.fr
Message no. 3
From: Peter David Boddy <pdboddy@****.CARLETON.CA>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 07:27:52 EDT
Simon T. Sailer writes:
> The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
> all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
> the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
> gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
> by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
> Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
> Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

Uh, huh,huh,huh, you said master... (sorry, my roommate has hooked me on
Beavis and Butthead) =).

Seriously, as long as those who are GMing can keep track of what's
happening through everyone's turn at GMing, multiple GM's can be a good
thing. It gives everyone a chance to play, and gives people a chance to
get around GM-block. Our group has three GM's at the moment, for three
different games. Usually we play two different games, while the third GM
is refining his game. Works so far...

Pete

Pete aka Spitfire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Quote of the Week: Math and Alcohol don't mix,
don't drink and derive.
Peter David Boddy
Carleton University
Email address: pdboddy@****.carleton.ca
Email address: pdboddy@******.carleton.ca
Email address: bx955@*******.carleton.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 4
From: HAUPT ULRICH FB08 <sandman@****.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 13:49:55 MEZ-1MESZ
On Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:22:26 +0100 "Simon T. Sailer" wrote:

snip hello and so on

> Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

I do play in several groups (4 at least I think) and in all groups
the GM changes. One GM is the MasterMaster. He is the only one who
has to be asked for relevant changes like

hello Big Master,
I'd like to blow up that city. Is that all right or do you want that
one for another adventure...

This way erverybody can do both playing and mastering. I think it is
the best way (so I chose it :-) ). I don't think it's so good if
only one guy (or girl / woman of course) is the master EVERYTIME and
is NEVER a player. You can't estimate the rules und the feeling of
the players very well if you are never on their side.
But I think a GM should not let his charater play his adventures. I'd
think to give his character as many Karmapoints as the lowest of the
players recieved (or one less), if this prevents such NPC/PC doubles.

That's just my humble opinion of course :-)

Sandman
Message no. 5
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 13:38:48 GMT
Simon T. Sailer writes
>
> The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
> all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
> the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
> gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
> by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
> Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
> Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?
>

It is nice if everyone gets a chance to play games. The arrangement i
am used to is that different folks run different systems different
days of the week and often for a different mixture of players.

The idea of more than one GM for a single campain however (what i
think you meant and some replies didn't seem to catch) has been
discussed here before and has some advantages and disadvantages.

bonuses.
Everyone gets a chance to play SR without getting so much of the game
everyone burns out.
GM block is avoided to a considerable extent as folks can take a
break.
You get more variety of runs as different people tend to write
different adventures. (or spread the cost of buying FASA's further)

Problems.
Camapin continuity / long term plots: campain control particularly of
interaction with AAA corps, etc can become more difficult, who runs
the fixer contact today etc. Also co-ordinating availablitiy of
equipment etc to suit different GM's and similar things without the
GM's having to give each other spoilers about ideas.
NPC's, what happens when 'z' is GMing and 'y's' PC decides that the
best solution is for 'a's' character to talk to an NPC usually part
of 'a's' game, do you arbitarily say 'not available all the time' or
what. Also PC/NPC favouritism problems become much more possible.
Rules interpretaion, this list should be enough demonstartion, the
various GM's need downtime to argue out points, and people vary on
their ways of doing things, some announce 'the troll shoots you,
(description) 11S 5 successes' others just the damage code and do you
want to karma it (and don't tell you to stop wasting karma once you
dodged! despite the fact its a player level game mechanic) etc etc
etc.
Message no. 6
From: Les Ward <lward@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:55:21 -0400
Simon T. Sailer writes

> Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

In Shadowrun, absolultely. There are so many forces at work in Shadowrun
and half the fun is just figuring out what's going on. You cannot build
long term plots with secrets if everyone can GM. The best SR campaigns I've
ever been in had a healthy dose of paranoia, and if you, as a player, are
let in on secrets your character doesn't know, it ruins the whole thing.

Wordman
Message no. 7
From: David Taylor <Harvester@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:36:06 +0100
>The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
>all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
>the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
>gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
>by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
>Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
>Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?
>
> Thanks
> ss (back at last)

You sound like your in a group similar to mine. I have found it's not a =

good idea to let characters go between gamesmasters, especially if
they all have different styles. I tend to run power behind the throne
style campaigns, so characters tend to be able to talk, stealth, have
no-combat skills. While another GM tends to run mass slaughter
adventures, so you need huge psychotic street sams and combat
mages. So transferring characters tended to leave one type of
character bored out of his mind. So probably, different characters
for different GMs is the best bet (well in my case).

Other advice, I would say one to two magic characters maximum, its
still supposed to be rare. Although if your groups small, the all mage
group can be good fun, watching the group come together as
initiates and build power together. Deckers and riggers can be a big
problem (IMO), deckers can be left out of the game a lot especially
if they have no other real skills, so NPC them unless you have a
player that enjoys doing nothing for a while. One alternative to that
is the GM making a decker and the group controlling decking, ie
all having a say in what is done on a matrix run. Riggers are fine
within limits, I had a player who drove the group round, did a little
recon, gave support in fire-fights and stared blankly at me the rest of =

the time, if you feel this is going to happen, don't let them play one.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----------------------------------------
You wanna see something really scary !!!!
- Twilight Zone : The Movie
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----------------------------------------
Harvester@**********.com
Message no. 8
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:58:46 -0400
Les Ward[SMTP:lward@*******.COM] wrote:
> Simon T. Sailer writes
>
> > Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?
>
> In Shadowrun, absolultely. There are so many forces at work in Shadowrun
> and half the fun is just figuring out what's going on. You cannot build

Yeah, half the fun is the secret plotting - but one GM can bog down
pretty fast with dealing with just *one* group of plots. Having 2 GMs
is nice, because not only do you have a backup if the first GM gets
lynched ( :-) ), but you can get even more plots. It's also better
from a playing perspective, because you can't tell if the GMs talk
to each other and coordinate their plots into a bigger one... Otherwise
the players tend to assume that all the plots are linked.

I'm co-GMing a BGC game and playing in a co-GMed SRII, and I think that
it's working out pretty well.

> long term plots with secrets if everyone can GM. The best SR campaigns I've
> ever been in had a healthy dose of paranoia, and if you, as a player, are
> let in on secrets your character doesn't know, it ruins the whole thing.

Well, the GMs don't have to discuss *everything*. It's always nice to
have a few surprises up your sleeve, but as long as the GMs cooperate
on a general level things can get pretty nasty. Just think - two evil
GMs, feeding off of each other... :-)

James Ojaste
Evil GM #2
Message no. 9
From: adonis <adonis@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:00:09 -0400
> > Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

Yep. IMNSHO, it greatly detracts from the continuity of the game if you
have more than one GM. No matter how hard they try, everyones playing
style is different, everyone resloves senarios different. With one GM (a
sufficiently creative one anyway) your NPCs will have consistent
personalities, areas will be as you remember them, campaigns can go on for
long periods without loss of cohesion.

I've been on the same campaign for 5 months now, and it's not even close to
starting to be boring...if anything it just got better, with the arrival of
2 dragons (one of them is Ryumio), in a town that's run by a Great
Serpent/Dragon hybrid (long story).

>>>>[Think yer wiz eh sammy? C'mon down to San Fran and try dat drek! Look
up da Crystal Fox an' tell 'em I sentcha...if ya can! heh heh heh!]<<<<
- T.H.U.G. notime/noplace

SOOiCydE
Message no. 10
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:27:13 -0600
| > > Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

Depends on the group and/or GMs in question.

If the GMs agree to share the world and draw their borders from the
beginning then it can work. For example one GM could lay claim to
the Mafia, IEs and the UB. The other could claim the Yak, Orcish
underground and Humanis. And they should divy up the players'
contacts. Everything else could be considered fair game. It can be
a lot of fun when the PCs are thrown multiple campaign themes (what
is life if not chaos? :) But the point is that the GMs do have to do
some communicating, but they don't have to give their ideas away.

The group has to be accepting of the whole arrangement also. And
while one GM is playing he has to act like a player and the other players
have to treat him like a player.

I tried this once the problem I ran into was the other GM started
using some of my NPCs and mucked up a story line of mine. I also had
a hard time biting my tongue and not butting in when he was GMing
("You should be doing it like this..."). And there were a couple of
times when other players would expect me to change what was happening
(when I was playing).

Hope that helps.

-David
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
Message no. 11
From: Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:13:02 -0600
At 12:22 10/15/97 +0100, you wrote:

>The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
>all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
>the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
>gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
>by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
>Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
>Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

IMO, it depends entirely on the type of campaign you run.
If you run a campaign of mainly 'shorts', you can probably safely use two
or more GM's. If your campaign depends heavily on background movement and
hidden plots, it is probably not appropriate to have extra GM's.

However, if you want temporary relief, you could probably arrange 'safe
zones', for an alternate GM to use, like "Sure, I'll have no problem with
you having the players involved in some gang warfare, but you can't touch
corps X Y and Z."

Of course, the inherent danger in having a GM play a character is he'll
favour the character.. but that's normal :)

-Aj

-
http://shadowrun.home.ml.org \ TSS Productions \ The Shadowrun Supplemental
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader \ WildAngle@******** \ fro@***.ab.ca
From The Jury's Bench: http://www.interware.it/shadowrun/jurybench
Message no. 12
From: Shaun Hall <Hard.master@********.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:03:44 -0700
----------
: From: Simon T. Sailer <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>
: To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
: Subject: Gamemasters
: Date: Wednesday, October 15, 1997 4:22 AM
: The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
: all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
: the game, we took turns in
: gamemastering . This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
: Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
: Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?
:
: Thanks
: ss (back at last)

Years ago my crew and I tried something like that. We spent hours in
design sessions so that the game world would be able to integrate
everyone's style of gaming, and gamemastering. Other GMs ran two scenarios.
The rest were run by myself. I'd like to think that this was because of my
exceptional creativity, but I suspect it was because the others really
wanted to play more than GM. I've never seen a co-gm operation work very
well. Gm's seem to have to have a very strong view of the game world, and
it rarely integrates well with anyone else's.

Shaun
Message no. 13
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:13:58 +0100
Simon T. Sailer said on 12:22/15 Oct 97...

> Hi everybody...
> I'm Obviously back from my far too long absence...

Welcome back :)

> (my english is as bad as it was then)

It is? Well, if you say so...

> The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
> all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
> the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
> gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
> by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
> Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
> Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

In our group, I'm usually the one being the GM, since I'm the one who owns
the game books (not just for SR, but for most other games as well).
Luckily one of the players wanted to GM Mage (using my books), so once
every while I now have a chance to play a game without being the GM.

However, I enjoy being the GM, as it allows me to know what's going on
without having to figure it out, unlike the players :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Turn into nothing less than nothing new.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 14
From: "Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:25:00 +0100
Thanks for your answers, everyone... quot capitae, tot sententiae...

The reason for my problem was mainly the handling of npc's ...
onegamemaster introduces a npc, and the next has no idea how to play
him...
I am of the opinion that it would be ideal to have just one
gamemaster, but for me, thats technically impossible...
I am puzzled where those permanent gamemasters get their
inspirations from... I can maximally write a run per month...
So I'll leave anything as it is... Whoever writes a run, is
gamemaster...

Thanks
ss
Message no. 15
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:36:16 GMT
Simon T. Sailer writes
>
> The reason for my problem was mainly the handling of npc's ...
> onegamemaster introduces a npc, and the next has no idea how to play
> him...
This has got to be one of the biggest problems with multiple GM's.
Even handing over a campain to another GM posed some problems here,
one of the PC's had been dealing as the teams fixer and buying off
his fixer contact and had been taking about a 20% cut in the process.
The GM taking over had been playing the character who was the gang
boss who who have lynched the aforementioned PC were he to find out.
[Player information problem potential or what! in this case with good
folks the new GM finding out would almost certainly cripple any
possible 'work it out by clues' by his character. In the and its been
no problem, between the hand over and the new GM's old PC dying it
hasn't come up but......]
the other was a relationship with the Triads, always intended to be
small time, but through roleplaying when i was running it a major NPC
had noted one PC only as worth attention, only there is no way i'm
giving the stats to the new GM as i use the same triads in the other
game which i'm still running and that GM plays, so in changing GM's a
potentially valuable contact gets lost due to the real world.

Yes this sort of change can be done but the problems.....

> I am of the opinion that it would be ideal to have just one
> gamemaster, but for me, thats technically impossible...
> I am puzzled where those permanent gamemasters get their
> inspirations from... I can maximally write a run per month...

Inspiration can be a problem particularly during the 3rd month of a
weekly campain.
I find that once a game gets going and established i can introduce
some reoccuring bad guys, the PC's make friends with various NPC's
who i've put in for my enjoyment (so i get to roleplay a character
for a bit) or to give them someone to talk to, useful contacts for
handing out kit through, maybe a skilled mage i plan as a method of
getting initiation loose in the game once the times right and so
forth.
One particular NPC (Mist) Whom i have mentioned here before serves as
an example.
He was brought into the game in the first place as a knowledgeable
runner mage who headed a magical group he founded himslef that would
be suitable for PC's to join as he's a moderately reasonable guy.
Over time i have worked on his plans, folks have shown him various
things and so forth and he's grown. His plans have led to quite a few
runs, many of which the players didn't know at the time were his
operations :) despite how well some of them know the guy. [i think
one or two are still attributed to 'another GM's Johnson' :) but].
I have gotten hours of roleplaying from discussions (and not just
with the teams magicians i may say, one corporate 'acquisition' (like
he gave the target a chance even though no PC's were involved)
acquired access to a Delta grade shadowclinic which has been most
popular :) [he has no use whatsoever for the thing but....], some
most interesting adventures, Kennedy Space Centre anyone??? oh don't
let Ares know you went <grin>.

Mis in a few FASA adventures where suitable, and some one off
corporate runs, bodyguarding work etc and eventually the campain
becomes pretty much self designing, the problem become writing
different runs and turning 'this will happen' into a decent adventure
that will keep all the characters involved when players can come and
go, the odd character get in it beyond his/her head and some players
get the flu at the most inopportune moments and cannot let the GM
know before 6 other player are sat about the table expecting 7-8
hours of game! Still they keep comming back for more depite the UCAS
gov, (inc Simon Juraez :) ), Axtechnology, Transys Neuronet, Raku, the
Mob, Triads, Yaks, bugs (by the cityload at one time), 1000 Karma
mage NPC's and runs within runs by Johnsons who are not what they
claim and are not doing what they claim while not double crossing the
team (Though the run the run was within was Celtic Double cross), oh
nealy forgot the UK, 2 Tirs, Germany, and double crossing immortals :)

Mark
Message no. 16
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:31:10 -0400
In a message dated 97-10-16 09:21:24 EDT, Hard.master@********.ATT.NET (Shaun
Hall) writes:

> Years ago my crew and I tried something like that. We spent hours in
> design sessions so that the game world would be able to integrate
> everyone's style of gaming, and gamemastering. Other GMs ran two
scenarios.
> The rest were run by myself. I'd like to think that this was because of my
> exceptional creativity, but I suspect it was because the others really
> wanted to play more than GM. I've never seen a co-gm operation work very
> well. Gm's seem to have to have a very strong view of the game world, and
> it rarely integrates well with anyone else's.
>
> Shaun

But it is possible. Mike and I are doing it, thought admittedly most of the
rule checks have to pass through both of us, and I -tend- to be rougher than
he is. Not always, just tend to be.

-K
Message no. 17
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:53:59 -0400
J. Keith Henry writes:
> In a message dated 97-10-16 09:21:24 EDT, Hard.master@********.ATT.NET (Shaun
> Hall) writes:
>
> > Years ago my crew and I tried something like that. We spent hours in
> > design sessions so that the game world would be able to integrate
> > everyone's style of gaming, and gamemastering. Other GMs ran two
> scenarios.
> > The rest were run by myself. I'd like to think that this was because of my
> > exceptional creativity, but I suspect it was because the others really
> > wanted to play more than GM. I've never seen a co-gm operation work very
> > well. Gm's seem to have to have a very strong view of the game world, and
> > it rarely integrates well with anyone else's.
> >
> > Shaun
>
> But it is possible. Mike and I are doing it, thought admittedly most of the
> rule checks have to pass through both of us, and I -tend- to be rougher than
> he is. Not always, just tend to be.
>
> -K

Just my two cents. (I am a postive creature today, I suspect its
because its raining and work is slow). I two have occasionally
seen multiple GM's from one game system. However we usually played
different characters/worlds. (Remember AD&D...Forgotten Realms
vs Greyhawk). In my current group, we occasionally do something
similiar, but I GM shadowrun, another guy does Warhammer, and
another Champions, so we trade off. Gives us a break and
allows some consistency. Still it largely depends on your GM's
and players. Everybody has to work together better. In shadowrun
I would say one GM do a module, then the next do a different
one. Don't switch in the middle. (I would apply this to most
game systems). (Actually the Harliquin stuff may work well
doing this. Hmm.....)

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The nice thing about standards,is there are so many to choose from.
Message no. 18
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:37:02 -0400
In a message dated 97-10-16 12:42:19 EDT, decker@****.FSU.EDU writes:

>
> Just my two cents. (I am a postive creature today, I suspect its
> because its raining and work is slow). I two have occasionally
> seen multiple GM's from one game system. However we usually played
> different characters/worlds. (Remember AD&D...Forgotten Realms
> vs Greyhawk). In my current group, we occasionally do something
> similiar, but I GM shadowrun, another guy does Warhammer, and
> another Champions, so we trade off. Gives us a break and
> allows some consistency. Still it largely depends on your GM's
> and players. Everybody has to work together better. In shadowrun
> I would say one GM do a module, then the next do a different
> one. Don't switch in the middle. (I would apply this to most
> game systems). (Actually the Harliquin stuff may work well
> doing this. Hmm.....)
>
The way we've got it, we both (Mike and I) track central, important
information all the time together. Unusual quirks specifically
listed/designed for us (our own character's when the other's playing) we
don't share, unless we simply canNOT hold it in. It's one big timeline, and
the stories have worked so far.

We recently had an influx of players join/rejoin us, and they aren't used to
Mike's style, which is actually very similar to my own now (scary thought).
It let's me notice quirks that other players do to other GM's in a whole new
light. It also let's me catch players "conniving ways" much differently as
well.

-K
Message no. 19
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 14:01:32 -0400
J. Keith Henry writes:
> In a message dated 97-10-16 12:42:19 EDT, decker@****.FSU.EDU writes:
>
> >
> > Just my two cents. (I am a postive creature today, I suspect its
> > because its raining and work is slow). I two have occasionally
> > seen multiple GM's from one game system. However we usually played
> > different characters/worlds. (Remember AD&D...Forgotten Realms
> > vs Greyhawk). In my current group, we occasionally do something
> > similiar, but I GM shadowrun, another guy does Warhammer, and
> > another Champions, so we trade off. Gives us a break and
> > allows some consistency. Still it largely depends on your GM's
> > and players. Everybody has to work together better. In shadowrun
> > I would say one GM do a module, then the next do a different
> > one. Don't switch in the middle. (I would apply this to most
> > game systems). (Actually the Harliquin stuff may work well
> > doing this. Hmm.....)
> >
> The way we've got it, we both (Mike and I) track central, important
> information all the time together. Unusual quirks specifically
> listed/designed for us (our own character's when the other's playing) we
> don't share, unless we simply canNOT hold it in. It's one big timeline, and
> the stories have worked so far.
>
> We recently had an influx of players join/rejoin us, and they aren't used to
> Mike's style, which is actually very similar to my own now (scary thought).
> It let's me notice quirks that other players do to other GM's in a whole new
> light. It also let's me catch players "conniving ways" much differently as
> well.
>
Sounds like a cool game. But it sounds like a fair bit of work
for the two of you. Heh..as a player, I just hoped you weren't
both having a bad day on the same day. :) Two evil GM's is not
better then one!


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The nice thing about standards,is there are so many to choose from.
Message no. 20
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:55:55 -0400
In a message dated 97-10-16 13:50:10 EDT, decker@****.FSU.EDU writes:

> Sounds like a cool game. But it sounds like a fair bit of work
> for the two of you. Heh..as a player, I just hoped you weren't
> both having a bad day on the same day. :) Two evil GM's is not
> better then one!
>
>
We like to think so...the fun/headaches begin when the players start asking
"game ruling questions", one GM (the one running the game at the moment) is
busy with another PC, so they turn to the other (who's trying to enjoy the
game) 'off duty' GM to ask the question (damn, but this irks me).

I've been using my favorite saying a LOT "hey, Mike's GMing, ask him, wait
your turn"...but I've been tempted to do something nasty....

And who says "two evil GM's aren't better than one?" Think of it as a choice
of evil's for the afternoon/evening/wee early morning....

-K
Message no. 21
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 14:16:44 -0400
J. Keith Henry writes:
> In a message dated 97-10-16 13:50:10 EDT, decker@****.FSU.EDU writes:
>
> > Sounds like a cool game. But it sounds like a fair bit of work
> > for the two of you. Heh..as a player, I just hoped you weren't
> > both having a bad day on the same day. :) Two evil GM's is not
> > better then one!
> >
> >
> We like to think so...the fun/headaches begin when the players start asking
> "game ruling questions", one GM (the one running the game at the moment) is
> busy with another PC, so they turn to the other (who's trying to enjoy the
> game) 'off duty' GM to ask the question (damn, but this irks me).
>
> I've been using my favorite saying a LOT "hey, Mike's GMing, ask him, wait
> your turn"...but I've been tempted to do something nasty....
>
> And who says "two evil GM's aren't better than one?" Think of it as a
choice
> of evil's for the afternoon/evening/wee early morning....
>
Heh...so I get a choice of evil! Ah much better.
I've seen this before (and not just in RPG's). If people
know you are the "authority" regardless of being on duty or
off duty, you are on duty. :)
Heh..two gm's...kinda like getting a single answer out of your
parents when you were younger! :)

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The nice thing about standards,is there are so many to choose from.
Message no. 22
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:36:07 +0100
Simon T. Sailer said on 13:25/16 Oct 97...

> I am puzzled where those permanent gamemasters get their
> inspirations from... I can maximally write a run per month...

It took us about two or three months to get through Super Tuesday; in my
campaign the Big D has only been killed about a month ago in real time,
and much less than that in game time. Inbetween I ran the Immortal Elvis
adventure that's become a running joke in the group, and a short run from
Shadowland magazine.

I'm currently doing some FASA-published adventures (Total Eclipse tomorrow
night) and after that, well, I don't know yet. Maybe I'll put this team
through my ICBM silo run or something (Fro might know what I'm talking
about, if he's read it by now).

The way I tend to make adventures is by having an idea get stuck in my
head, working out a few minor things around it, and then improvising the
rest during the game session. I hardly ever really put anything on paper,
except possibly afterward (e.g. the silo run I mentioned).

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Turn into nothing less than nothing new.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 23
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:50:26 -0600
Gurth wrote:
|
| Simon T. Sailer said on 13:25/16 Oct 97...
|
| > I am puzzled where those permanent gamemasters get their
| > inspirations from... I can maximally write a run per month...
|
| I'm currently doing some FASA-published adventures (Total Eclipse tomorrow
| night) and after that, well, I don't know yet. Maybe I'll put this team
| through my ICBM silo run or something (Fro might know what I'm talking
| about, if he's read it by now).
|
| The way I tend to make adventures is by having an idea get stuck in my
| head, working out a few minor things around it, and then improvising the
| rest during the game session. I hardly ever really put anything on paper,
| except possibly afterward (e.g. the silo run I mentioned).

I just get flashes of inspiration from time to time. Like yesterday when I
ploted out the next 4 adventures. It also helps to have a campaign goal so
that you have a lot of resources to draw on.

I also work on the next adventure while I'm running the current one.

-David
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
Message no. 24
From: "Mike (Leszek Karlik)" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:28:26 +0000
On 16 Oct 97, Lehlan Decker disseminated foul capitalist propaganda
by writing:

> Just my two cents. (I am a postive creature today, I suspect its
> because its raining and work is slow). I two have occasionally seen
> multiple GM's from one game system. However we usually played
> different characters/worlds. (Remember AD&D...Forgotten Realms vs
> Greyhawk). In my current group, we occasionally do something
> similiar, but I GM shadowrun, another guy does Warhammer, and
> another Champions, so we trade off. Gives us a break and allows some
> consistency. Still it largely depends on your GM's and players.

Yes, that's what we do, too... Doesn't everybody? :> I.e. I run Amber
DRPG and Star Wars, a friend of mine runs CoC, another one runs SR,
another one Vampire and my brother runs AD&D (yeah, we do play AD&D.
Got a problem with this, chummer? :> )

> Everybody has to work together better. In shadowrun I would say one
> GM do a module, then the next do a different one. Don't switch in
> the middle. (I would apply this to most game systems). (Actually the
> Harliquin stuff may work well doing this. Hmm.....)

Well, I'm against the "multiple GMs" approach. We've only did it in
the early stages of our RPing experience, when we only had one
system... And it was pretty much hack&slash.
So while it should work with straightforward hack&slash type games,
like AD&D, WoD or SR, you would have troubles with more
sophisticated, plot-driven games like AD&D, WoD or SR. And I don't
really imagine a GM-shared Amber game <shudder>


Mike (Leszek Karlik) - trrkt@*****.onet.pl; http://www.wlkp.top.pl/~bear/mike
FL/GN Leszek/Raptor II/ISD Vanguard, (SS) (PC) (ISM) {IWATS-IIC} JH(Sith)/House Scholae
Palatinae
Life's not passing me by, it's running me over!
Message no. 25
From: Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:47:57 -0600
At 13:25 10/16/97 +0100, you wrote:

>I am puzzled where those permanent gamemasters get their
>inspirations from... I can maximally write a run per month...

Ah..well, since I rarely write up anything in advance besides a few notes,
I don't have near the problems. If anything, I let the players decide what
they're going to do for the night. Remember, it doesn't need to be a
'run', it doesn't even need to be 'work'.. :)

>So I'll leave anything as it is... Whoever writes a run, is
>gamemaster...

That's how most people play RPG's around here, and the main problems I see
with that is a) Lack of continuity, and b) GM's having 'revenge' plots on
so-and-so's player, because so-and-so killed the GM's character last time
so-and-so GM'ed..
But those can be avoided, if you're all fairly mature and take the time to
plan things out.

-Adam

-
http://shadowrun.home.ml.org \ TSS Productions \ The Shadowrun Supplemental
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader \ WildAngle@******** \ fro@***.ab.ca
From The Jury's Bench: http://www.interware.it/shadowrun/jurybench
Message no. 26
From: "Logan Graves <Fenris>" <logan1@*****.INTERCOM.NET>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:26:52 -0400
In our last episode, Simon T. Sailer wrote:
>
> The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
> all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
> the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
> gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
> by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
> Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
> Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

I have seen multi-GM plots done well (-exception) & very poorly (-rule)
for both Shadowrun & **&* settings. It depends heavily on the maturity
level of ALL the GMs.
Normally, just finding somebody willing to GM is a major step for us.
(Three guesses as to who normally gets stuck GM'ing even 'tho he'd much
rather be a player... ;-)

IMO two games which worked especially well multi-GM'd are:
"Ghostbusters" by West End Games
& "Champions" by ICE/Hero Games (actually any of theirs' work v. well)

Probably *THE* worst game for multi-GM play would have to be:
"Paranoia" also by West End Games.

--Fenris
_______________________________________________logan1@*****.intercom.net
(>) "Well, he looks dead to me. I don't
care if he does have a pulse."
(>) --Dr. Oscar Schneiderbunk, Coroner, Aztechnology Pyramid
Message no. 27
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 23:09:19 EDT
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:28:26 +0000 "Mike (Leszek Karlik)" writes:

>Well, I'm against the "multiple GMs" approach. We've only did it in
>the early stages of our RPing experience, when we only had one
>system... And it was pretty much hack&slash.
>So while it should work with straightforward hack&slash type games,
>like AD&D, WoD or SR, you would have troubles with more
>sophisticated, plot-driven games like AD&D, WoD or SR. And I don't
>really imagine a GM-shared Amber game <shudder>

So.. your saying that multiple GMs will work for games like AD&D, WoD and
SR.. but *not* for ones like AD&D, WoD, or SR.

Ah... I'm usually thought of as being a fairly perceptive guy, but I
think I'm missing something.
:)
~Tim
Message no. 28
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 23:09:18 EDT
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:25:00 +0100 "Simon T. Sailer" writes:
>Thanks for your answers, everyone... quot capitae, tot sententiae...
>
>The reason for my problem was mainly the handling of npc's ...
>onegamemaster introduces a npc, and the next has no idea how to play
>him...

Boy, that solution is pretty easy... if it's not your NPC, don't play
him. And the players should have enough grey matter to recognize that
expecting to get lots of detailed and characteristically accurate info
for GM A's game from GM B's NPC is a waste of time. If it's a contact,
well if you have more than 2 players then you could certainly get through
one run with out having to use npc's that the other GM uses (unless one
of the GM's decided to lay claim to ALL the Contacts...bad idea IMHO). I
guess it depends on gaming styles and campaigns, but it would only be a
serious problem if the players interact heavily with only a few important
people. If that IS the case, like having the players ONLY do jobs
through a certain fixer (which is another GM's pet NPC), then you'd need
to restructure your campaign if you'd want to utilize more than one GM.

>I am of the opinion that it would be ideal to have just one
>gamemaster, but for me, thats technically impossible...

Same here.

>I am puzzled where those permanent gamemasters get their
>inspirations from...

If you find out let me know, eh?

>I can maximally write a run per month...
>So I'll leave anything as it is... Whoever writes a run, is
gamemaster...

Hey, have you ever tried to do a, what we call, "round-the-table" or
"random-GM" game? It's largely a great GM exercise in on-the-fly gaming
and sponanaity. Just start with one GM, and then randomly (or
sequentially) switch GM's every 1/2 hour to hour until everyone at the
table has GMed at least once. There are only two rules... try to
maintain some sort of coherency and don't pass on any info beyond PC
level (like what happened to any PC's that the next GM's PC didn't know
about, but not what you were planning to do in the next scene or Mr. X's
*real* motivation). No preparation, just good, clean, fast paced (how
could it be anything else?), and completely off-the-cuff gaming. We've
had a few really good games come out of it that gelled real nicely and
were a lot of fun for all involved. A good ending is also very important
- you gotta tie up all the loose ends. Lots of fun, and good therapy for
burn-out.

It's also a good opportunity to introduce some of the players to
GMing.... (and potentially take up some of the slack later on).

Anyway, what you said is how it works in our group... if you write/plan
it, then you GM it.

~Tim
Message no. 29
From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:20:40 -0700
---"Simon T. Sailer" wrote:
>
> The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
> all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
> the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
> gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
> by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
> Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
> Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

I've been the sole GM of my S/R group(s) since it's release in '89.

Though I do enjoy playing when given the chance, for our game I feel
the single GM adds to continuity (reappearing NPC's, locations,
ongoing plotlines, etc.).

-== Loki ==-
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Fearless Leader of the Shadowrun Trading Card Game Mailing List
SRCard FAQ: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr/srstuff/tcgfaq1.htm
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Poisoned Elves: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr
SRTCG trade lists last updated 10/11/97
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com
Message no. 30
From: David Mezerette <mezeretted@*****.U-NANCY.FR>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:12:44 +0100
At 16:47 16/10/97 -0600, you wrote:
>At 13:25 10/16/97 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>I am puzzled where those permanent gamemasters get their
>>inspirations from... I can maximally write a run per month...
>
>Ah..well, since I rarely write up anything in advance besides a few notes,
>I don't have near the problems. If anything, I let the players decide what
>they're going to do for the night. Remember, it doesn't need to be a
>'run', it doesn't even need to be 'work'.. :)

That's what i do most of the times too: an idea, a way to make them start
up, a clue or two about how it should finish, and them i let my players
flesh the story out, w/ the help of the library of NPCs and contacts i have

The only exception to it is when i have to write a scenario for a
convention: there's nothing as straining as trying to imagine what players
are gonna do, and how to make other GMs 'feel' the plot of ur story. The
main advantage is perhaps a (little) more coherent result, but i don't think
it's worth the dozens of hours work it implies (but still, it's for a
convention, not only for my players....)

ChYlD
mezeretted@*****.u-nancy.fr
Message no. 31
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 10:22:34 -0400
Mike (Leszek Karlik) writes:
> On 16 Oct 97, Lehlan Decker disseminated foul capitalist propaganda
> by writing:
>
> Yes, that's what we do, too... Doesn't everybody? :> I.e. I run Amber
> DRPG and Star Wars, a friend of mine runs CoC, another one runs SR,
> another one Vampire and my brother runs AD&D (yeah, we do play AD&D.
> Got a problem with this, chummer? :> )
>
Heh..not in the least. I haven't played inawhile, and still
miss it on occasion. It's where must of us started I guess.


> > Everybody has to work together better. In shadowrun I would say one
> > GM do a module, then the next do a different one. Don't switch in
> > the middle. (I would apply this to most game systems). (Actually the
> > Harliquin stuff may work well doing this. Hmm.....)
>
> Well, I'm against the "multiple GMs" approach. We've only did it in
> the early stages of our RPing experience, when we only had one
> system... And it was pretty much hack&slash.
> So while it should work with straightforward hack&slash type games,
> like AD&D, WoD or SR, you would have troubles with more
> sophisticated, plot-driven games like AD&D, WoD or SR. And I don't
> really imagine a GM-shared Amber game <shudder>
>
>
I don't find it so bad if you switch from module to module
as long as the GM's work together (of course that may mean
at least two players know what is really going on, which
kinda takes the fun out of going from GM->player)
Heh..for hacknslah, go battletech, nothing beats large
robots with laser and axes. :)
(Come to think of it, most of my playing revovles around
FASA products lately).
Anyway...back to the regularly scheduled thread.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The nice thing about standards,is there are so many to choose from.
Message no. 32
From: "Mike (Leszek Karlik)" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 16:43:13 +0000
On 16 Oct 97, Tim Cooper disseminated foul capitalist propaganda by
writing:

> On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:28:26 +0000 "Mike (Leszek Karlik)" writes:
<snip>
> >So while it should work with straightforward hack&slash type games,
> >like AD&D, WoD or SR, you would have troubles with more
> >sophisticated, plot-driven games like AD&D, WoD or SR. And I don't
> >really imagine a GM-shared Amber game <shudder>

> So.. your saying that multiple GMs will work for games like AD&D,
> WoD and SR.. but *not* for ones like AD&D, WoD, or SR.

Yep.

> Ah... I'm usually thought of as being a fairly perceptive guy, but I
> think I'm missing something. :)

Hmmm... Well, that's pretty simple, actually. All of the above
mentioned games can be hack&slash (multiple-GM approach works nice)
and/or (more or) plot-driven, in which case multiple-GM approach
doesn't work nice...
It all depends on what games you play. (Ok, I just geeked next 10
Cybermancied Troll Cyberassasins. Well, gimme my 50 karma points and
then I run... :> )

BTW: I knew somebody's going to pick that one up... :P


Mike (Leszek Karlik) - trrkt@*****.onet.pl; http://www.wlkp.top.pl/~bear/mike
FL/GN Leszek/Raptor II/ISD Vanguard, (SS) (PC) (ISM) {IWATS-IIC} JH(Sith)/House Scholae
Palatinae
I LOVE MARGARET HOLMES - Good Lord, Watson, so do I!
Message no. 33
From: "Mike (Leszek Karlik)" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 17:25:13 +0000
On 17 Oct 97, Lehlan Decker disseminated foul capitalist propaganda
by writing:

> > Yes, that's what we do, too... Doesn't everybody? :> I.e. I run Amber
> > DRPG and Star Wars, a friend of mine runs CoC, another one runs SR,
> > another one Vampire and my brother runs AD&D (yeah, we do play AD&D.
> > Got a problem with this, chummer? :> )
> >
> Heh..not in the least. I haven't played inawhile, and still
> miss it on occasion. It's where must of us started I guess.

We didn't really start from AD&D, but I wanted to play it after
reading the Adventurers series by Tom Miller... Oh well. :>

> > Well, I'm against the "multiple GMs" approach. We've only did it in
> > the early stages of our RPing experience, when we only had one
> > system... And it was pretty much hack&slash.

> Heh..for hacknslah, go battletech, nothing beats large
> robots with laser and axes. :)

Ummm... Can they do Dungeon Crawls (TM)? And sling spells? BTW: Large
robots with lasers and axes - isn't this a strategy board game
thingy? :-P I mean, MechWarrior is fine, but I don't think it's good
for hack'n'slash... :>


Mike (Leszek Karlik) - trrkt@*****.onet.pl; http://www.wlkp.top.pl/~bear/mike
FL/GN Leszek/Raptor II/ISD Vanguard, (SS) (PC) (ISM) {IWATS-IIC} JH(Sith)/House Scholae
Palatinae
Visit Russia before Russia visits you.
Message no. 34
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:06:58 -0400
Mike (Leszek Karlik) writes:
> On 17 Oct 97, Lehlan Decker disseminated foul capitalist propaganda
> by writing:
>
> > > Well, I'm against the "multiple GMs" approach. We've only did it
in
> > > the early stages of our RPing experience, when we only had one
> > > system... And it was pretty much hack&slash.
>
> > Heh..for hacknslah, go battletech, nothing beats large
> > robots with laser and axes. :)
>
> Ummm... Can they do Dungeon Crawls (TM)? And sling spells? BTW: Large
> robots with lasers and axes - isn't this a strategy board game
> thingy? :-P I mean, MechWarrior is fine, but I don't think it's good
> for hack'n'slash... :>
>
>
I suppose BattleTech is not an RPG.....Hmm...ok..how about
Champions. :) RPG, with little or no-roleplaying. (At least
the way we play)

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The nice thing about standards,is there are so many to choose from.
Message no. 35
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 15:59:12 EDT
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 14:16:44 -0400 Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
writes:

>Heh...so I get a choice of evil! Ah much better.
>I've seen this before (and not just in RPG's). If people
>know you are the "authority" regardless of being on duty or
>off duty, you are on duty. :)

Hey, just qualify your answer with ".. well that's how *I'd* rule it, but
it's His game, ask him."
-or-
Shrug and say "I dunno..."

I use either one, depending on my mood. :)

~Tim (who is sometimes asked by the *GM*...)
Message no. 36
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 15:59:13 EDT
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:53:59 -0400 Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
writes:

[...]

>.. In shadowrun I would say one GM do a module, then the next do a
different
>one. Don't switch in the middle. (I would apply this to most
>game systems). (Actually the Harliquin stuff may work well
>doing this. Hmm.....)

Oh, definately!! By all means DON'T switch GM's in the middle of an
adventure/run/module (unless it was explicitly designed for that)... and
that's not just for SR.

I think I'd disagree about the Harliquin runs... there's a lot of behind
the scenes info that the GM has to consider, and if a GM is going to both
run and play something out of H, it'd be tough to keep the info separate.
Sometimes just not reading the part of the book that you aren't running
isn't enough.

~Tim
Message no. 37
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 17:11:35 EDT
On Fri, 17 Oct 1997 16:43:13 +0000 "Mike (Leszek Karlik)" writes:

>BTW: I knew somebody's going to pick that one up... :P

That's OK, I figured that's what you were saying, but it was just too
tempting to pass up.
:)

~Tim
Message no. 38
From: Tobias Berghoff <Zixx@*****.TEUTO.DE>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:07:00 GMT
on 15.10.97 Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT wrote:

SS> The question is, If all of your teams have ONE single gamemaster and
SS> all others are players. In my (former) team, no one wanted to master
SS> the game, so everyone created a character, and we took turns in
SS> gamemastering, while the character of the current master was played
SS> by somebody else. This solution is not very good, if you ask me...
SS> Anybody got similiar experiences/advice/similiar problems?
SS> Does a team need a permanent gamemaster?

I guess it really depends on the game. In a SR-game, I'd say 'yes', as the
GM has to think up much if the background and the "who does what"-part.
Then, most players don't want their background to be common knowledge, so
circulating the GM isn't a good idea. OTOH, I know of a group that plays a
fantasy game (Midgard) and they do the turning-thing for years...

And I know the problem. Right now, in my group we have a bit of a problem
with the GM and the other players have the strange idea that I'm the best
GM in the rest of the group (If you ask me, they're just lazy)). The
problem is: I want to play. GMing is fun, but I don't want to do it all
the time....



Tobias Berghoff a.k.a Zixx a.k.a. Charon, your friendly werepanther physad.

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------------
GAT/CS/S/IT d--- s+:- !a>? C++(++++)
UL++(++++) P+ L++ E W+ N+(+++) o? K?(-)
w---() O- M-- V- PS+ PE- Y+>++ PGP-
t+(++) 5+ X++ R* tv b++ DI(+) D++ G>++
e>+++++(*) h! r-- z?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
Message no. 39
From: Gabriel <bginc@***.ZEELANDNET.NL>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 14:18:33 +0100
On 16 Oct 97 at 12:13, Gurth wrote:

> In our group, I'm usually the one being the GM, since I'm the one who owns
> the game books (not just for SR, but for most other games as well).
> Luckily one of the players wanted to GM Mage (using my books), so once
> every while I now have a chance to play a game without being the GM.

You still have to deal with that deer in the bathtub :)
>
> However, I enjoy being the GM, as it allows me to know what's going on
> without having to figure it out, unlike the players :)

Hehehehehe.


Gabriel "Lance Cooney" Knight

"When you gotta go, you gotta go."

bginc@**********.nl

http://people.zeelandnet.nl/bginc
http://www.dahx.demon.nl
http://www.page4life.nl/Midnight
http://www.geocities.com/Timessquare/Alley/5147

-----------BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
Version 3.1
GCS/P d- s: a--- C++ U--- P! L E-- W+++ N-- o--
K- w+ O- M- V? PS+ PE- Y PGP- t++(+++) 5+ X+
R+(++) tv++ b+ DI- D--- G e h! r---(!r) y--
-------------END GEEK CODE BLOCK--------------
Message no. 40
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 10:42:04 -0400
Tim Cooper writes:
> On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:53:59 -0400 Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
> writes:

[Stuff snipped]

> Oh, definately!! By all means DON'T switch GM's in the middle of an
> adventure/run/module (unless it was explicitly designed for that)... and
> that's not just for SR.
>
> I think I'd disagree about the Harliquin runs... there's a lot of behind
> the scenes info that the GM has to consider, and if a GM is going to both
> run and play something out of H, it'd be tough to keep the info separate.
> Sometimes just not reading the part of the book that you aren't running
> isn't enough.
>
True. I was just thinking it would give it a wierd continuity, and
make it feel like it was all different un-related runs. Would
require lots of work, and good GM's however.


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The nice thing about standards,is there are so many to choose from.
Message no. 41
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Gamemasters
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 21:03:03 EDT
On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 10:42:04 -0400 Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
writes:
>> I think I'd disagree about the Harliquin runs... there's a lot of
behind
>> the scenes info that the GM has to consider, and if a GM is going to
both
>> run and play something out of H, it'd be tough to keep the info
separate.
>> Sometimes just not reading the part of the book that you aren't
running
>> isn't enough.
>>
> True. I was just thinking it would give it a wierd continuity, and
>make it feel like it was all different un-related runs. Would
>require lots of work, and good GM's however.

Well, from that respect, it could be an aid to the overall campaign,
keeping the players from being aware of the fact that they are playing a
large module. However, as I said, if the "off-duty" GM is going to play,
it's more work to keep things honest and/or fun.

I've never managed to get a single group of PC's all the way through
Harelequin, but the few times that I ran parts of it, I tried to space it
out between other GM's games.. but it ended up to be an exercise in
futility due to our erratic gaming habits. (Hmm... I'm thinking that it
might be time to try it again..)

~Tim

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Gamemasters, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!