lilappleblossom
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 51
Preferred Game Systems: 3.5, Dark Heresy, Only War, Grimm, Savage Worlds
|
Post by lilappleblossom on Jan 11, 2014 16:46:32 GMT -8
I'm currently running my first real game that also happens to be my groups first modern, semi-realisitic game. It's a horror game, but the horror aspect isn't a problem for me, it's the modern aspect. With everything as it is in our world as far as technology and such goes, getting some normal people to get together and go after a goal is proving difficult for me. I'd like the show to cover how to write/run/play modern settings. Your advice has already helped me so much I want to be a better GM and you guys are definitely getting me there and I'm sure this is only one bump on a long, hard road to better GMing, but I know Happy Jack's will be there to see me through. So if you guys could touch on this subject my group and I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you!
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Jan 11, 2014 22:19:46 GMT -8
Oh yes this please. I've always run fantasy or scifi, but in modern I feel a bit out of my element. I'm not even sure how to describe that... Do others have that problem? Or can better help me define what is different and how to deal with it. I too would like to run some games in modern settings. (Specifically Dread system horror)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2014 2:18:21 GMT -8
getting some normal people to get together and go after a goal is proving difficult for me. I've run into the 'normal people' issue before when trying to run a modern game akin to Heroes with regular people gaining superpowers they didn't have control of. Suffice to say the game fell apart because the players were too good at RPing; as normal people would they were far more concerned with running away and hiding from the conspiracy than engaging with it and being protagonists. The best piece of advice I've got for the situation is something Stu has mentioned a lot for character gen, ask the players to make characters who would actively seek involvement in the plot. They can still be normal people, they're just the sort of normal people you'd see in stories or TV shows as opposed to reality.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jan 12, 2014 8:19:41 GMT -8
Look....
I get the hatred of railroading. Really, I do. I'm right there with all of you as well.
However... Still and all... And yet....
It's also incumbent on the players to take a bite of the hook you're dangling in front of them (or fashion a hook of their own). This is about telling interesting and fun stories.
Now... If their idea of interesting and fun is sitting alone and not doing anything, then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe a nice game of Papers & Paychecks will be more to their liking. ^.^
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Jan 12, 2014 10:29:19 GMT -8
There must be something in the stratosphere...like the polar vortex...that is getting several people to think about running a modern horror game. Yes I wholeheartedly agree with both @whodo and ayslyn a horror game involves a HUGE amount of player buy in. For me horror is all about messing around with the sense of control a character might have in a given situation. This is a tricky dance of giving the players of said characters enough control to feel like they can actually affect the story and yet be apprehensive enough to know that they are most likely out of their depth. Very few people I know that play RPGs do so to have their character walk into a room and get hacked to pieces by X. But the thrill of horror, for me, comes from that sensation of trying to walk that razors edge of survival knowing that chances for doing so are slim but you JUST MIGHT MAKE IT. Horror for me also has to be generally subtle. Games have a tendency to devolve into slapstick/scooby doo if the MONSTER/antagonist shows up too soon, and it turns into a hack-n-slash game. In the case of many Call of Cthulhu games its the player characters that get hacked and slashed. I have often heard other GMs say that horror is the most challenging of games to do well. I'd agree but that doesn't mean you shouldn't give it a go. Some of the main points I'm trying to keep rattling around in my addled brain are these: 1) Keep it personal (pass notes, do sidebars, have emails that create backstories for each character allowing each player to experience the game uniquely) This is where I would also make sure that during character gen each player MUST create characters that for whatever reason would continue to participate in the ongoing story...to a point. I'll use last nights character gen session in my "A New Dark Age" campaign as an example: Each player has created a character using Stu Venable's Moment of Truth system this system has a Strengths/Weaknesses component that is similar to Advantages/Disadvantages in GURPS or Savage Worlds. But what I really like about it is the emphasis on the narrative and role playing component of each strength or weakness. As the players came up with their various traits I made sure to think about how each might come into play to KEEP THE CHARACTER IN THE STORY. Character Examples: "The Actor" is so focused on creating his art that he will at times just remain oblivious to whatever is going on around him. So even when nasty shit starts to happen he will still be wondering if his posture, hair, etc. is looking good. "The Phonographist" obsessed with new and interesting sounds to make recordings of that he will pursue even past the point of his own personal safety "The Widow" a caregiver that will always seek to help those in need even at the expense of her own welfare. So, I think it is very important for a horror game to have characters that are built with not only reasons to stay in a SCARY situation but to make that situation even more interesting. And also make the characters have a reason to be concerned or at least take notice of the other player characters safety. 2) Keep it Subtle Make the initial story mundane to a degree. Let the characters pursue their interests and have normal everyday conflicts for a few sessions with hints of the bizarre and strange thrown in as clues and foreshadowing to the coming "oh shit!" plot drop. Again I think its vital to create interesting characters during creation to give them SOMETHING TO DO! 3) Don't Be Too Serious I think some GMs approach a horror game like the darkest of movies. I don't now about your gaming group but my friends would not sit through a three hour "SAW" game. I think silliness and jokes are totally appropriate for a horror game. They work as tension relievers and honestly I think help create a greater cohesion between the players when things get really bad. The most fearful I have felt as a player during a horror game occurred during a bout of nervous laughter and dick jokes meanwhile the GM sent me a note about what my character was experiencing and it suddenly stopped me cold. I was in the FEAR ZONE! And it was great! 4) What You Don't See is the Really Scary Part (a reiteration of the subtly point) I really enjoy Lovecraft stories (even the crappy ones) . But when he's really on his game he's just hinting at things, shadows, sounds, shuffling in the dark. This is the realization that our imaginations are our own worst enemy when it comes to fear. Give the players some hints and let them fill in the blanks with the horror. The most terrifying parts of JAWS are when the woman is yanked down by an unknown force. We the viewer know its bad, its terrifying but we don't know what it is...that's where the real horror starts. Phew! What a ridiculous ramble! But this is definitely where my heads at right now thanks for starting the thread lilappleblossom. Cheers, Curt. Here's the recording of our character gen. I haven't edited it yet so the first 20 minutes is us talking about food trucks...Oh the Horror!
|
|
sbloyd
Supporter
WHAT! A human in a Precursor service vehicle?!
Posts: 2,762
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller; Dresden; Mage
Favorite Species of Monkey: Goddamnit, Curious George is a CHIMP not a monkey! Stop teaching my daughter improper classification!
|
Post by sbloyd on Jan 12, 2014 13:02:26 GMT -8
Did someone say... POLAR VORTEX?! Seriously, though: Getting a group of modern people to go after the goal? Take a page from Our Favorite Minmaxer From Cleveland, and before the players roll up characters, tell them "A group of people is in such-and-such situation. Roll up those characters." Or however you decide to do it. Have you listened to Stu's Moment of Truth (or was it still Drama Tension Conflict then?) actual play? The player characters were a random group of people in a Quickie Mart when the Shit Went Down. That was the glue that bound them together. You could even go so far as to say to the players that each character has to be friends with at least two others, for example. Regardless, I'd say have character generation be a session unto itself, rather than having the characters generated in a vacuum. That seems to go a long way for developing party cohesion, plus you can supervise the process and gently steer the characters in the direction you'd like if you need to.
|
|
lilappleblossom
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 51
Preferred Game Systems: 3.5, Dark Heresy, Only War, Grimm, Savage Worlds
|
Post by lilappleblossom on Jan 12, 2014 13:20:44 GMT -8
Yeah, that's the thing. I've already started the game and started them off all in a museum for an exhibition of creepy stuff. Once sufficiently creepy stuff happened they all kinda looked at each other then just...Went their separate ways. *Cue GM facepalming*
|
|
sbloyd
Supporter
WHAT! A human in a Precursor service vehicle?!
Posts: 2,762
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller; Dresden; Mage
Favorite Species of Monkey: Goddamnit, Curious George is a CHIMP not a monkey! Stop teaching my daughter improper classification!
|
Post by sbloyd on Jan 12, 2014 15:12:02 GMT -8
Oh.
Well, hit them over the head with the Ominous Bat. Give them each a dream that night - maybe written out on a notecard or something - with all of them back at the museum, and smack them with ominous portents of doom should they split up.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jan 12, 2014 15:48:11 GMT -8
Yeah, that's the thing. I've already started the game and started them off all in a museum for an exhibition of creepy stuff. Once sufficiently creepy stuff happened they all kinda looked at each other then just...Went their separate ways. *Cue GM facepalming* Yeah... That's your players being jackasses...
|
|
|
Post by henryhankovitch on Jan 12, 2014 16:52:45 GMT -8
What this possibly highlights is how we rarely play "normal people" in fantasy or historical type games. They're adventurers, soldiers, wizards, thieves, nobles, scoundrels, and so on. People don't generally play games where five peasants take up their pitchforks and go fight the goblin menace; and I would daresay that when they do, it's more of a short-lived novelty compared to most campaigns.
But when we run games in the real world, the bizarre nature of murderhoboing is even more obvious. So you have a choice between true "bystanders"--everyday people--or those who by their profession are duty-bound to go into dangerous situations.
I think this is a case where Delta Green is instructional. DG is basically a setting book for the Call of Cthulhu RPG. Regular CoC leaves it up to the players and GM to find a reason for an antiquarian, an heiress, a retired Marine and a tribal fisherman to go investigating horrible things together. There's no intrinsic, unifying theme. One of the primary goals in writing Delta Green was to create a scenario where likely "adventurers" would be brought together. Namely, an extralegal conspiracy working within the government to fight Mythos threats. So the average group of PCs is a guerrilla-style cell of government agents and other "friendlies," who get sent secret assignments. Someone dies horribly and a new PC has to be introduced to the party? You get an encrypted email saying "we're sending Agent Barker to you. Get it done, B-cell."
Other unifying themes also work well. Military teams, police investigators, even a neighborhood watch. It's one of the easiest way to justify a modern adventuring group, without having to rely on everyone being related to the same dead-under-mysterious-circumstances NPC. You need a plausible way for the PCs to know one another, and a plausible motivation for them to do something other than skip town. It doesn't need to be a heartfelt motivation shared by all the PCs, but an initial nudge in the right direction. Maybe your cop isn't willing to die fighting the flying fungi aliens from Pluto; but his job and his duty will start him down that path before he finds out what's really going down.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jan 12, 2014 17:42:40 GMT -8
Maybe my groups are a major anomaly, but we've never seen much of the murder hoboing thing. We've always been about setting up shop in an area, and adventuring around that area. Even if we go a-wandering, it's with a purpose, and often ends with us setting up shop wherever we finally landed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2014 4:56:45 GMT -8
The easiest way to get a group of modern "normal" people to stick together is to give the no other choice. Take away their exists and kill off the people they'd go to for help.
You say yo started in a museum. Have the security system go off causing a lock down with think metal gates sealing them in. When they run to the guards for help either have them dead or make them part of the cult or whatever your big bad is. Not only does this force them to work together to survive, but it also adds to the horror, you've taken away their safety lines.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jan 21, 2014 10:55:37 GMT -8
That works great for a one-shot, but for a campaign... Not so much. ^.^
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2014 17:00:25 GMT -8
Except I've used that basic concept for multiple campaigns and its worked fine. The player characters didn't start as heroes, they weren't special in any way nor did they know each other or have any background fluff that would make them stick together as a team. The key thing though was that in each case the players were invested in the game by the end of the first session. They wanted to play that game and see where the story lead so when I dropped a plot hook they grabbed it and ran with it. Not always in the direction I expected, but they still did something.
Having reread lilappleblossom's posts it really sounds like the players weren't really interested in the game that was being presented to them. If the moment plot hooks started dropping in the form of creepy stuff they just decided to run and hide then they were actively avoiding paying the game that was being offered. As you said earlier, there has to be player buy in or the game is over. If the players wandered off the moment the things actually started happening then there wasn't buy in.
This is a problem the GM can only fix by talking to their players and making sure that everyone is on the same page about what kind of game they want to play. If the players don't want to play "normal" types of characters then nothing the GM does is going to make them stay together.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jan 21, 2014 17:42:57 GMT -8
No, I meant the "You're trapped here together, so you have to work together."
It's great once.... Use it over and over again, and it's railroading on the most basic level.
Now, I'm sure you weren't encouraging a series of adventures where the characters are constantly being trapped in some different locale... But I thought it bore mentioning for those that might now think of it.
|
|