A Return to the Stars
-
After a veeeeerrrryyyy long, and mostly unplanned, hiatus, Stuart and I got
together to play more Stargrave in recent days. It was good! It was also a
bit ...
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
The Gospel According to Wilen
Last week I was checking out Elliot Wilen's livejournal. He has a nifty little item called "The history of the GM-as-God meme" that's worth a look-see. Although it is out of fashion in some circles, I generally work within the model of the GM as benevolent dictator. As a gamemaster I want all the power that comes with that set-up and I'm willing to accept that means I shoulder the lion's share of responsibility for the game. Some people seem to think that being the omnipotent autocrat of the game means ignoring or undervaluing player concerns. Far from it. I'm always struggling with trying to make sure the game is about them just as much as it is about me. But when that doesn't work out I can't really blame anyone but myself. On the flip side I always try to support the GM when I'm on the other side of the screen, because I can sympathize with the GM's plight. It's not always easy juggling an entire universe in your head while trying to keep everyone else's desires front and center.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
%202.png)
.JPG)
.png)
.gif)
Posts
I've written many odd things in my time, but only one calligraphy button. For all I know it's still available back east. It reads:
ReplyDeleteThe GM is not God.
God is one of my little NPCs.
I'm pretty sure you slipped that gem into the Risus Companion as well.
ReplyDeleteHey, Jeff, thanks for linking to my LJ.
ReplyDeleteIt's been a while since that post but I think what I wanted to emphasize was just how far "outside" the game-world a GM's authority could extend. Al Bruno has one story where the GM insists that all the players take their shirts off. Can't say I've experienced that, but I'm sure many can recall a time when the GM role was only available to a couple members of a group, RPing was a regular social activity, and the particular form of that activity--in terms of game system and campaign setup--was entirely at the discretion of the GM. Which in turn did lead to episodes not entirely unlike some Al Bruno story, where disagreements and power conflicts are played out inside the game rather than on the level of normal social interaction. I think my favorite (hopefully fictional) example is "The day I killed the entire party before the first combat encounter".
You can see the germ of this sort of thing in the first Arneson quote: the players show up for Napoleonics and he offers them a dungeon instead. Luckily it worked, though not without resort to forceful diplomacy and "the bat".
For a variety of reasons, the distinction between this social role and the purely in-game role of the GM is easy to lose track of. I think for some people, it fades completely. A baseball umpire has multiple roles and areas of authority: judge of physical reality (did the fly ball bounce or was it a clean catch?), interpreter of the rules, and enforcer of sportsmanship (with power to warn and eject). The problems with GM power that some people have reported are a bit like what would happen if, either in perception or reality, those roles ceased to be distinguished.
Oh, something I wanted to add: when you come up with that letter from Greg Costikyan in regards your theory of geographically-based gamer cultures, I'd appreciate a heads-up. (Say, a comment somewhere on my LJ.)
ReplyDeleteOne more thing while I wait for my wife's train to arrive...
ReplyDeleteI agree with you (Jeff) and SJR. The "benevolent dictator" setup can and does work, the key being a recognition of responsibility to "the people" in exchange for their support. It's popular these days to say the GM is just another player, but in traditional gaming that just isn't so. The GM isn't quite as divorced from "player-hood" as an NFL referee, but I believe most good GMs are, like you, aware of the fact that they wear more than one hat, and work hard to balance their roles.