Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Justin Elliott <justin.elliott@*******.OTAGO.AC.NZ>
Subject: GMing style.
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 12:51:36 +1200
Just for interests sake : which GMing style do you people prefer/use for
running SR?

For example: do you use the Plot Style, where the whole run is "mapped" out
and the team has to go through a set series of encounters in a set order,
or the Free Style method, where the GM wings it, allowing player actions to
determine the course of the run(even if it goes outside the idea originaly
concieved by the GM)? Or someother style?

I'm just interested in what style people think is the best for SR and why.

Justin.
Message no. 2
From: cocheese <ZKLJ1@****.EAST-TENN-ST.EDU>
Subject: Re: GMing style.
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 21:20:55 EDT
I do a little of both. The structure has to be there (a logical sequence of
events, etc.) and yet you have to give pcs the flexibility and "elbow room"
they need to not feel like lab rats.
If they wander off course and deserve it (killing everyone, to include all
contacts, etc.) then let them suffer the consequences for it. As the same
time don't "steer" the party, if the evidence, info, etc. leads the way on
its own then they can lead themselves. They also feel better by achievement
and role-playing as opposed to "the gm wants us to be friendly to this guy.."
or "the gm is REALLY playing this scene up."

CoCHeese
Message no. 3
From: Justin Pinnow <jpinnow@***.IM.MED.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: GMing Style
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 09:05:31 -0400
Justin Elliott wrote:

>Just for interests sake : which GMing style do you people prefer/use for
>running SR?
>
>For example: do you use the Plot Style, where the whole run is "mapped" out
>and the team has to go through a set series of encounters in a set order,
>or the Free Style method, where the GM wings it, allowing player actions to
>determine the course of the run(even if it goes outside the idea originaly
>concieved by the GM)? Or someother style?
>
>I'm just interested in what style people think is the best for SR and why.


Oh no!! Not another Justin--can the world handle this?? ;)


I prefer a middle ground. I like to set up some likely-to-happen events with a
few possible and not-necessarily relevant, but could be used events before I
start. Then, if players fall away from what I thought they would do, I go with
it and adjust as necessary. If they are way off base and are clueless, I give
them some pointers (all done in the game using foreshadowing, omens, etc...)

I would never railroad anyone into doing something...the campaign, IMHO, should
be flexible, or it will only please the GM...not the players. I have this
thing against domineering, control freaks....especially as GM's. :)


Justin :)

_______________________________________________________________
(jpinnow@*****.edu)

Geek Code (version 2.1):

G!>ED d----(d+/d++$) H s-: !g p? au
a23 w+(+++) v?(*)>!v C+(++) U- P? !L
!3 E? N+ K- W+ M+ V+ po---
Y++(+) t+@ 5 !j R+(++) G' tv-- b++>+++
!D B--- e+ u+ h- f? r+(*) N----
Y++

It all starts from within you.
Message no. 4
From: "S.F. Eley" <gt6877c@*****.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: GMing style.
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 09:13:03 -0400
Justin asks:

> Just for interests sake : which GMing style do you people prefer/use for
> running SR?
>
> For example: do you use the Plot Style, where the whole run is "mapped" out
> and the team has to go through a set series of encounters in a set order,
> or the Free Style method, where the GM wings it, allowing player actions to
> determine the course of the run(even if it goes outside the idea originaly
> concieved by the GM)? Or someother style?

So far I go by the "Plot Style," but then, I'm a relatively new Gamemaster
and my players are relatively new players. I'm still trying to get everyone
up to speed to the point where simple combat takes less than an hour, we
remember some of the target numbers for decking, the rigger has something to
do, and the front man doesn't consistently forget to ask Mr. Johnson for
cash up front. >8->

Because we're all still trying to get running style straight, my plots have
been pretty simple, with only one or two encounters in a run. Within a few
weeks I plan to have everyone at the point where they can handle more
sophisticated adventures. My litmus test is _Bottled Demon_, which I'll
probably throw at them in two weeks.. Once they can handle that, I think
they'll be able to start on some of the REAL ideas I have for the campaign.


Blessings,

_TNX._

--
Stephen F. Eley (-) gt6877c@*****.gatech.edu )-( Student Pagan Community
http://wc62.residence.gatech.edu|"Much of the economic decay of south-east
My opinions are my opinions. | Asia...is undoubtedly due to a heedless and
Please don't blame anyone else. | shameful neglect of trees."-E.F. Schumacher
Message no. 5
From: Jani Fikouras <feanor@**********.UNI-BREMEN.DE>
Subject: Re: GMing Style
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 16:07:25 +0200
> >Just for interests sake : which GMing style do you people prefer/use for
> >running SR?
> >
> >For example: do you use the Plot Style, where the whole run is "mapped"
out
> >and the team has to go through a set series of encounters in a set order,
> >or the Free Style method, where the GM wings it, allowing player actions to
> >determine the course of the run(even if it goes outside the idea originaly
> >concieved by the GM)? Or someother style?
> >
> >I'm just interested in what style people think is the best for SR and why.

I like to read a module/form the plot in my head and then try to handle
each "scene" as a separate part of the run. So the runners go from one
"separate module" to the other. Things can get more complicated if certain
things have to happen in a certain moment, but its all a matter of planning
actually. I feel that if a GM understand how these "modules" relate to
each other he can very easily wing it if the PCs do something unexpected
or even add more "modules" on the fly.

> I would never railroad anyone into doing something...the campaign, IMHO, should
> be flexible, or it will only please the GM...not the players. I have this
> thing against domineering, control freaks....especially as GM's. :)

Me too, so I try to keep the sory straight in my head. I hate GMs who
change stuff on the fly just to make the life of the players harder.

--
GCS d H s+: !g p1 !au a- w+ v-(?) C++++ UA++$S++L++$>++++ L++>+++ E--- N+ h*(+)
W(+)(---) M-- !V(--) -po+(---) Y+ t++ 5++ R+++ tv b++ e+ u++(-) f+ r- n!(-) y?

Moderator of alt.c00ld00z (coolness in general)
Message no. 6
From: Stephanos Piperoglou <sneakabout@**********.HOL.GR>
Subject: Re: GMing style.
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 17:14:45 +0300
On Tue, 11 Jul 1995, Justin Elliott wrote:

> Just for interests sake : which GMing style do you people prefer/use for
> running SR?

I always use improvisation, and a parallel plot. I set up a couple of
circumstances, jot down any interested parties, and then let the plot
flow, making up what the NPCs do depending on what the PCs do.
_________________________ ______________________________
_____/ Stephanos J. Piperoglou \_____/ sneakabout@**********.hol.gr \_________
Geek Code v2.1 (finger for info): PGP key available on request
GAT d H-- s++:++ !g p? !au a16 w v+++* C++++ UL++>++++ P+ L++>++++ 3 E>++ N+ K
W--- M !V -po+ Y++ t+ 5++ !j R+++ G+ tv- b++ D+ B? e>--- u**(*) h! f+ r n@ y?
"Where would you aim if you had the biggest gun in the universe?"
__________________________ -Adm. Tolwyn, Wing Commander ]I[ ________
\ http://parthenon.hol.gr/people/sneakabout/
~~~~~ ^ ^ ^ Under Construction ^ ^ ^ ~~~~~
Message no. 7
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: GMing style.
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 10:45:07 -0400
On Tue, 11 Jul 1995, Justin Elliott wrote:

> Just for interests sake : which GMing style do you people prefer/use for
> running SR?

I use a fairly free-form style. Basically, I create the
environment in which the players function. But that environment is never
static. Just look at the world around us. It's always changing. I try
to keep that same thing going in my campaign, so things happen that are
totally beyond the control of the players (such as the invasion and
subsequent occupation of the city they live in). But every once in a
while they are in the right place at the right time to influence the
world's events.
Also, I keep the subplots as just that...subplots. Most of the
characters have a number of different things going on at once. As far as
the uberplot goes, I play that by ear. It changes with the circumstances
and the kinds of runs the characters get offered depends on the changing
environment and their various reputations. They always have the option
to turn down a run (sometimes the most wise move) and I have no problems
running things that they want to do on their own ("hey, let's rob a
bank..."). All in all, it works well, and it makes it very easy to keep
continuity and player interest.

Marc
Message no. 8
From: David Hinkley <dhinkley@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: GMing style.
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 15:15:04 -0700
When I begin to prepare for a run I start with the mission, what
the PC's are suposed to do. Then I determine what the players are going
to need to know to complete the mission and what would make the run
more easy, safe, and or profitible. Having determined all this I then
start on the villian or heavys, the johnson, and the task he hires them
to complete (Yes, the Task from the Johnson may not be the mission [Evil
GM Grin]). Then I rough out settings as well as when and where the PC's
will get the information and items they will need, key information and
equipment recives redundent settings. The GM who repeatedly creates
hopeless runs does not get the players back for another gaming session,
so it is important that if the players absolutly have to have a
bright red 14 inch left-handed monkey wrench to complete the task they
have at least one chance to get it (or at least a blue one and a can of
red spray paint) if they fail to take it, I may give them another chance
after that I let them go, after all It can be fun to wht a bunch of
people carefully plan out a rescue and at the last minute relize that
they don't have the address. Thats how the learn. But if they don't have
the addres because they arrived late or not at all for a key meet with a
NPC then its bad GMing.
Having done all of this prep work (at least once put togeather
while driving home from work on the day of the game) I then sort of wing
it, the players I game with often come up with an unexpected means of
completing the mission. I had one run almost still born when the
Principle PC (the one the Johnson called) made a single phone call called
in a favor and completed the Johnston's task with out including the rest
of the PCs. It took a bit of quick thinking to restructure the opening
scene so that the run could start. The principle ended up forking up the
expences for the run as He had gotten all the money (and HIS name on a
list [evil GM grin]) he was a fast talker and as a result the run worked.
Detailed planning is very good but just remember the first rule
of military planning
No plan survives the first contact with the enemy!

Hope this is of some use.

David Hinkley
dhinkley@***.org
Message no. 9
From: Paolo Marcucci <marcucci@***.TS.ASTRO.IT>
Subject: Re: GMing Style
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 08:24:31 +0000
One of the new approaches of FASA to modules is quite interesting: the free
form adventure like that found in Double Exposure.

To make up a run like that, the GM should prepare a chronological scale of
likely-to-happen events that will go off with or without players intervention.
Then prepare a series of encounters/locations where the players can find clues
or something other. Write this down on separate piece of paper (or different
paragraph on your word processor, if you GM like me, with my trusty laptop in
front :) and when a player says: "I want do go there/do this" you will be
prepared.

IMHO, taking suggestions from movies or books can lead to very "directed" runs,
where the players have less freedom than the free-form kind of ones.

BTW, one of my players, looking to be a GM, asked me if there is somewhere on
the net a kind of Writer's Guide to Shadowrun GM. Ya know, an article where the
procedure to write a run is described in a more pedestrian way...

Bye, Paolo

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paolo Marcucci
marcucci@**.astro.it
http://www.oat.ts.astro.it/~marcucci/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A loaf of bread, a jug of wine, a big TV with a hi-fi VCR and a nice
stereo, a full fridge, a microwave, a UNIX system, two phone lines,
a high speed modem, internet access.... and thou."
Message no. 10
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: GMing style.
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 17:27:37 GMT
> Just for interests sake : which GMing style do you people prefer/use for
> running SR?

Freestyle, with a few key events highly probable. Realistically, you have
to go to the computer room to steal the main processor, so the encounter
there is inevitable. How you reach that encounter is completely up to you.

> For example: do you use the Plot Style, where the whole run is "mapped" out
> and the team has to go through a set series of encounters in a set order,
> or the Free Style method, where the GM wings it, allowing player actions to
> determine the course of the run(even if it goes outside the idea originaly
> concieved by the GM)? Or someother style?

> I'm just interested in what style people think is the best for SR and why.

We tend to allow a lot of latitude, which causes problems with some
runs. Published runs are often tricky simply because of the long "Tell It
To Them Straight" where it says "you do this" and we say "Like *hell*
we do!"

Part of the fun of it is when the players go off at a tangent, or a bright
idea strikes the GM, and the run just starts to tell itself.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 11
From: Laughing Man oliver_wilken@*******.com
Subject: GMing style
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 10:41:55 PDT
I've noticed mention of the Immortal Elfs in a few places now (mainly
on this list). In my games they haven't even shown up yet, and that
is assuming that I will eventulaly introduce the concept. For now I'm
happy with Insect Spirits and Vampires manipulating from the
background (believe me, that eliviate allergy spell does wonders).

I also like to build up the players egos a little before bringing in
the 'big guns'. Right now they seem to think that they are invincable
(which is just where I want them).

So why should I use or not use the immortal elfs in my game? It seems
as though dragons can fill that nock quite easily.



*Laughing Man* >>Strikes-Again/Ha-Ha-Ha<<

He who laughs last laughs longest.

"Yes, I rebelled. It was a long time ago. How long was I meant to
pay for that one action?"
The Devil- 'The Sandman: Season of Mist', Neil Gaiman


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about GMing style., 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!