From:	Terry Amburgey <xanth@****.UKY.EDU>
Subject:	gamemastering
Date:	Tue, 22 Aug 1995 13:42:53 -0400

Eve wrote:

>I can't belive this. I was stunned at the whole "well, how come, if the GM's
>doesn't want (item/rule) in his game, and all the players do, why shouldn't
>the GM be considered outvited" thread, too, but I was too busy to say anything.
>
>Look. If a director makes a movie, an author writes a book; does the
audience or
>reader decide what it's about? Does the reader stand over the author's shoulder
>and shout; "No, don't kill that character! I like him!" Can you imagine the
>response? As an author, I can; I'd turn around and say, "hey, if you don't like
>it, don't read it." The GM is in charge of the world. That's what "Game
*MASTER* means. If all the players want a certain rule, and the GM doesn't,
then why
>doesn't one of those players be the GM for awhile, and the old GM can play, or
>not, as he chooses.

Interesting metaphor. I suppose I would argue that instead of a
single-authored work a good rpg would be 'shared' fiction. Something along
the lines of the 'Thieves World' series where multiple authors produced a
collaborative outcomes. Vis-a-vis movies, I would opt for the more recent
'interactive video' approach rather than the traditional mode of creating a
movie.

Where does it say that the gm is in charge of the world? [excuse my slip
back into the by-the-book mode]? Could an rpg work with a 'referee' instead?

> I can't believe we're arguing about whether the GM should be
>"all-powerful". That's the way it IS.

Female figurines with huge hooters wearing chainmail bikinis is also the way
it IS. That doesn't mean I shouldn't question the design practices of [for
example] Ral Partha.

>There's nothing wrong with suggesting
>things, or discussing things with the GM, but the end result is, the GM is
>making the game for you to play. If you don't like how he/she does it, then
>leave.

Yes, voting with your feet is always the final option.

>Are you going to argue with the writer of the adventure you're playing
>too? Call up FASA and complain that this rule sucks, and since you players
>outnumber FASA, then FASA should change?

No, we already know how this works - house rules.

>I admit that they may be open to
>suggestions, but this whole idea of "It just isn't *FAIR*"; well, I've got
>news for you.... neither is life.

Hard to argue with you here, life isn't fair.

>How many times has your GM "won"? (However you want to define it, I still
>maintain that it's not a contest, for crissake)

Yes, you've made it clear that you don't think it should be a contest [and
luckily, neither does my current gm]. On the other hand, how many [evil gm
grin] blurbs have you seen on the list? Or more explicit descriptions of
making life miserable for PC's? I haven't run into THAT many bad gm's so I'm
inclined to believe that it's posturing rather than an accurate description
of how people approach their game but who knows.

>How do you define the GM
>"furthering his own ends"? What the heck does he have to gain? He doesn't
>have any characters gaining Karma. If he wants the adventure to go a certain
>way, you can probably bet it's to make it more entertaining for *YOU*, the
>player. Goddamn that nasty GM, being sneaky and putting all that effort and
>thought in, just so you can have a better time. What a jerk.

Most of the time the MOTIVATION may be to make it more entertaining for the
PC's. But if this is true wouldn't the collaborative-authorship metaphor be
more appropriate? IMHO the single-authorship approach is part of the problem
- the 'author' decides what will be entertaining to the reader and if the
reader doesn't like it then the reader can take a hike. [time to put in some
psychology for Gurth :)] GM's can get the same ego involvement with 'their
world' as players can get with their characters.
When gm's put 'their world' ahead of fun for everyone then they start
'furthering their own ends'.

>As always and always, if you don't like it, leave. Whether it's a book, a
>movie, or a game.

I'd rather yak about bad product and how it could be better.

>If you've got a point, chances are others will be doing
>the same, and the author/director/GM will get the hint and start changing
>their product to be more acceptable to the audience.

A solid free-market approach. Are there a lot of gaming groups in your area
so that you can easily dump one campaign and join another?

>If you're just
>whining and bitching because you can't get your way and have everything
>happen that you want, then you can go off and make your own book/movie/game
>and do it just the way you want. Then everybody's happy.

I'm not sure how to respond to this one.

>
>Sorry, I'm ranting... enough for now.
>
Damn good rant though.

Terry L. Amburgey Office: 606-257-7726
Associate Professor Home: 606-224-0636
College of Business & Economics Fax: 606-257-3577
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY 40506