| From: | Wordman wordman@*******.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Independent Characters |
| Date: | Mon, 2 Oct 2000 18:52:26 -0400 |
> >when I KNOW my character should do one thing, but she's decided to do
> >something completely different. It's called the "plot goes this way
now!"
> >face...
Bad GM.
This thread originated when someone basically said 'I want my campaign to go
this way, but one of my players doesn't.' Most of they responses have been
making the assumption that the solution is to somehow 'deal' with the
'problem player'.
That's B.S..
It is the _player's_ job to tell the story. It is the GM's job to _mediate_
the story. The GM is there for the players, not the other way around.
Say you are a GM, and you spent a lot of time and effort coming up with an
adventure. If the players start moving off in a totally different direction,
guess what? You are presenting a story that the players don't want to tell
right now. Let them move it where they want it to go. I know it's a drag to
have put in a lot of effort and not see the result right away, but suck it
up and make it good for the players. That's what the GM is there for.
In what follows in this post, realize that I'm the type of person who thinks
that _bad_ role-playing sessions are far worse than _no_ role-playing
sessions. A bad session is like Highlander 2: you are actually worse off for
having seen it than if you had just been in a coma for the duration.
When this happens, you should remember some basic things:
1) You may very well be able to adapt the current situation to the story you
have prepared. Don't force it though. If it doesn't fit, don't fight to make
it.
2) If you can't present the story you want, save it. You will likely be able
to use most of it later.
3) If your story contains major events that were supposed to involve the
players, you might consider having those events happen without them. For
example, say the climax of your story was the destruction of the Space
Needle. If the runners have chosen not to follow your story, you might want
to have them see the Needle blow up from far away. This can be very
satisfying, especially if the event is one that might have been prevented by
the players had they followed the GM's story.
4) While the players are off on their own tangent, be as realistic as
possible. This means letting them get arrested, killed, etc. You are no
longer prepared for the story, so you should stick to realism as your guide.
5) Don't be afraid to let the players on their own story get bored. For
example, if you set up a meet, and the group decides they'd rather hang out
in a bar, don't feel like you have to make the bar interesting. You've
indicated where there is action, and if they don't want to take it, let them
wait.
In Shadowrun campaigns I was involved in, there was a catch phrase uttered
by two of the players who tended to guide the action: "the original plan is
still working". The "original plan" was this: "figure out where the GM
wants
us to go, and then go the opposite way." When I GM'd these guys, I loved the
"original plan". It meant that I really didn't need to do much work! I could
set up something basic, with full knowledge that it would never get followed
to the end. In this case, my job as GM was basically acting as the "straight
man", sort of a Harvey Corman with six siders. The players never saved the
world, but they had fun.
In the specific case mentioned to start this thread, most of the players
were willing to go with the GM, with one lone dissenter. In this case, it is
the _player's_ job to have their characters pull the dissenter's character
along, or the dissenter's job to convince the players to follow him. That is
how it works in real life. Pressure from a GM usually causes the player to
go against character. Reacting from pressure from other characters can't
help but stay in character. It may turn out in this case that to stay in
character, the dissenter must not go along with the group. If this is the
case, don't be afraid to let it happen, even if it means sending the player
home. Usually, this is not necessary, as most dissenter types will see the
writing on the wall. Also, if you can handle it, sometimes having to
separate threads can make a great campaign, although this is very difficult
to balance properly.
Another thing: the best time to stop dissention in a campaign is before it
ever begins. If you have five players that want to be mages that fight evil,
and one more that wants to be Bugs Bunny, you need to seriously consider
leaving Bugs out of your sessions. At the start of the campaign, it is
extremely important to get the players to agree on the tone they want the
campaign to have. Without this, you are pretty much doomed as a GM. Again,
as GM you need to be honest with the players, and if they want something you
don't, bow out as GM. Again, let the players set the tone. You are there for
them.
The best example of letting the players tell the story happened to me about
two years ago. I was a player in a fantasy campaign. About midway through
the campaign, among many other events that went on, we kept hearing rumors
of this corrupted temple to the south. It appeared that visiting this temple
might answer a number of questions we were grappling with. A number of other
events were in play, and eventually we (as a group) decided to ignore the
temple and go west. A seriously cool campaign followed, one of the best I've
ever been a part of.
When the campaign was over the GM asked if we had any outstanding questions.
We had a bunch, but by then, most of us had forgotten about the rumors of
the temple entirely. After hours of questions, someone finally said "oh
yeah. What was the deal with that temple?"
The GM said, "it would have been interesting to see what would have happened
had you guys gone that way. Hang on." He left the room and came back
carrying this _huge_ 3-ring binder. It must have been 500 pages. The GM
said, "about half of this is the stuff I worked up for the temple. Most of
the rest are things that lead from the temple. You managed to find out a
couple things going the other way, but it would have been a lot different
had you gone south." We asked him to let us see the binder, but he said "No
way. You never saw this stuff, so I can use it on you in the next campaign."
The guy wrote 500 pages of stuff that he never got to use because we turned
right. The thing that amazed me the most is that we almost never heard a
thing about it, had we not asked about the temple at the end.
That was a good GM.
