clanhanna
Journeyman Douchebag
The Muffin
Posts: 221
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller, O.R.E, Mongoose Traveller
Currently Playing: Vampire: The Masquerade, Vampire: The Dark Ages, D&D 5e
Currently Running: Vampire: The Dark Ages
Favorite Species of Monkey: Peanut-buttery Rhesus
|
Post by clanhanna on Apr 12, 2012 8:35:16 GMT -8
Though I do end up having to make stuff up most nights because they are so inventive that they play with it in ways that I never thought of. The game I'm running I'm usually spending half the night making shit up on the fly. Do you mean to imply that that's NOT the way it always goes?
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Apr 12, 2012 11:50:45 GMT -8
Though I do end up having to make stuff up most nights because they are so inventive that they play with it in ways that I never thought of. The game I'm running I'm usually spending half the night making shit up on the fly. Do you mean to imply that that's NOT the way it always goes? That's the way it goes if you're lucky. JiB
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Apr 12, 2012 18:32:02 GMT -8
So I have planned months in advance for a campaign that will last years. But I would say that this is a sandbox game - with the proviso that we agreed to lead into a political end game at a future point. This is a bit tangental, but I have no problem with people planning for months in advance for a campaign that could last years. Hell, When I ran my Changeling: the Lost game I had about a month between sessions and I was constantly planning during that down time. Maybe I didn't state it clearly, but the guy in question I mentioned before plans out story not setting. That's what I don't like. Before the Savage World fantasy game he was running fell apart, he casually mentioned to me that he had "planned out the story for the next six months." That set off alarm bells in my head. I think tappy said it on the cast before, but if the GM has planned out the story of what's going to happen then why am I playing? I agree, JiB, that a sandpile game is really difficult to do and won't work with most groups most of the time. This was kind of an experiment for me, as I was specifically trying to not go into the first few sessions with a defined setting. I guess you could say it was an experiment in collaborative world building during play. The only thing that my players and I knew for sure when starting the game was that this was a post-apocalyptic setting. I mean the game is called Apocalypse World, so really what else could it be. But that's it. I mean, the players knew what types of characters they were playing as ( AW uses something called a Playbook, which is like a combination of character class and character sheet but more like a character archetype). The leading questions set everything up. The players collectively came up with the concept of being a roving caravan that travels from place to place, came up with their character connections and roles in the caravan, and just about everything else. I think that's why I reluctant to throw anything at them that they didn't create or at least hint at themselves. If I was running this like a 'normal' game I, the GM would have all sorts of stuff going on around the PCs that they could get involved in. I'd come up with interesting NPCs that they could interact with. But this time I was specifically trying to not create anything myself, but rather to simply build off what the players came up with. During the sessions I just sit there with blank sheets of paper and scribble down all the things the players say about their characters and the world. Like if the go outside, I don't know what's there. So I ask them. "The gates rumble open and you step outside the hardhold's walls. What does Tor see when his eyes adjust to the sunlight?" Whatever answer the players give me becomes real. I guess I can say that my experiment in player driven content is already at least a partial failure. One of my players said that he needed more information about the setting to get a feel for what's going on. So I set some stuff in stone that I thought was cool rather than having the players create it. Maybe my goal was simply too ambitious to accomplish all at once. Like anal sex, I should have eased them into it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 20:38:42 GMT -8
I guess you could say it was an experiment in collaborative world building during play....One of my players said that he needed more information about the setting to get a feel for what's going on. So I set some stuff in stone that I thought was cool rather than having the players create it. This is based on my experience; your mileage may vary: Collaborative world building before a campaign starts can work very well. Collaborative world building during play does not work. I would recommend, before the next session (or in place of it), build the local area and a group of NPCs with the players. Sketch out what you're thinking for the setting and then ask for their opinions and suggestions. Ask them what their characters's berserk button is, who's their love interest, what's their favorite food, what is the stupidest thing they'd do on a dare? Sandbox games require the players and GM to know the characters well enough that they can predict which way the character will jump in reaction to a situation. The characters cannot just be numbers on paper.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Apr 12, 2012 22:35:31 GMT -8
Maybe I didn't state it clearly, but the guy in question I mentioned before plans out story not setting. That's what I don't like. Before the Savage World fantasy game he was running fell apart, he casually mentioned to me that he had "planned out the story for the next six months." I think I have problems with term definition: story. You likely did state it clearly. I likely do not use the correct term, as I see you use the term setting. Story, setting and world are three terms I need to grok the official contrasting definitions of. My apologies for the tangent.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Apr 15, 2012 21:32:45 GMT -8
No problem with the tangent, creativecowboy. Being railroaded or knowing that my character has to do something for the story to continue is a sure way for me to lose interest. Perhaps that why I don't usually have much interest in playing video game RPGs or adventure games. I don't want to do the "plot"; I want to go over here and see what's going on with this thing I think is interesting...
Just a little update here. I talked to all of my players and everyone is really happy with how the game is going. Huh. It's weird how different people can have different perspectives on the same thing, isn't it. One of my players really helped me out, though I think it was possibly unintentional. He mentioned how interested in a specific NPC his character was. They've met the guy for all of five minutes at the end of the last session and know next to almost nothing about him. When asked why my player rattled off like four or five questions that were inspired by all those leading questions I asked in session one.
Questions like "He seems like a decent guy, so why did he have me kill all those people?" "What does he plan to use me for?" "How does he view me, am I a productive member of society or just a disposable tool to him?" and I though, holy shit. Yeah. What does this NPC think about all this? I don't know. Let's find out. Which totally kick-started my brian. Let's hope the player in question has his character take the initiative to answer these questions rather than waiting to have them dumped into his lap as plot hooks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2012 4:13:09 GMT -8
Keep one thing in mind, Hyvemynd. It's not (or at least shouldn't be) just about whether the players are happy with the game.
I've been dealing with that recently, in my desires to switch our gameplay from one where they go through my story, to one where we go through a story we made together. The specifics of that idea make some of my players nervous, and I'm sure *all* of my players would be perfectly happy letting me lead them around by the nose, as long as I properly disguised it so it looked like they were affecting the story.
But I told them *I'm* not happy with that. If I want to come up with stories, I'll write a book. And so we're changing our tactic (or at least experimenting with it) not because the players are unhappy with the game... but because the GM is.
Just keep in mind, you have a right to enjoy the game as well. And it's just as important as whether or not the players enjoy it.
--Pukka Tukka
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Apr 16, 2012 8:04:17 GMT -8
Just keep in mind, you [the GM] have a right to enjoy the game as well. And it's just as important as whether or not the players enjoy it. WIN
|
|