:: Zelazny :: [polish] :: sparks that fly from the ironsmith's hammer ::
::. Saturday, March 15 .::
Perverse Access Memory:
WISH 38: Favoritism Do you (or your GM) “play favourites?” Do you feel you have to justify your answer? Do you have a horror story to share?
A question with lots of potential pitfalls.
I suppose that each relationship between a GM and a Player is unique: in a sense 'special'. It does lend itself to abuse, especially if Players see what they get from the game in very different ways. Immersive Players like to spend time with NPCs and seeing the world unfold. Tacticians and Conquerors like to get to the good parts of the challenge, only stopping to gather info to beat the enemy. A GM is likely to have their own preferences for what kind of story they want to tell... including methods of relaying information. Some of those techniques will definitely favor a style of Player. Some style that the GM likes themselves.
"Playing Favorites" can go beyond that compatibility issue described above. When it does, tolerance and trust between Players and GM might slowly or quickly evaporate.
There is something between GM and Players I call a "Trust Bank". You can make deposits to this Bank; you can make withdrawals. On a good day, you make several deposits, hitting issues that the Player enjoys, spotlighting a character, and generally being 'simpatico' with the Players style. On a bad day, you're tired, or you misinterpret something that the Player was hoping would surprise you, or you just aren't sharp enough to give good game. The idea of the "Trust Bank" is to never be "overdrawn" on your account with a Player. As long as you keep a good balance, you can take a Player places that make them nervous, or surprise them and everyone will have a good time. That's my justification.
Horror story? Hmm. Old versus New characters. A very hard thing to make work.
You have a successful campaign, but you're not opposed to new blood, so you bring new Characters into game. However, while everyone signed on for the idea of new Characters showing up, you (the GM) have a bias and understanding of the old Characters that cannot be matched by the new. Even if there is no point difference between old and new, even if there is no intended difference in adventures or access to power, those old Characters will have relationships and connections to the campaign and its people that the new characters can't match at first.
And that can spin jealousy and bias apparent or otherwise. Be careful out there.
:)
the artifacts of necessity* lie sleeping in the foundations of shadow :: mortsleam the black
:: the stainless steel gossamer
:: zzziskrik the queen of pain
:: the quarrelsome bane
:: the fruminous domestic
:: the impacable phantasm
:: the thing that was a thousand
...and those who rouse from slumber to twitch and shrug :: grayswandir the abominable
:: werewindle the rawg
...and those who watch :: nemesis the king of comedy
:: galantia the soft eternal
* these called in modern terms: spikards
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen :: soon to be a major film shown near you
I won't link you to the movie page, because I use this as a bad example of why many authors don't get decent treatment in film. Instead of the amazingly intelligent and gripping graphic novel, we have a stylized 19th century X-men in the making (and here's hoping that it IS that good.) They've added two characters who might be interesting, Tom Sawyer and Dorian Gray, and so modified Mina so that she is no longer the 'guiding mind' and leader of the group (patriarchal bias anyone?). They turn her into a wolverine clone by hint of spoiler sites out there. I mean, they didn't even let her keep her maiden name, Murray, instead calling her Harker (which was one of the best "insider bits" in the story). From the bits and pieces I've seen online, Nemo and Quatermain seem intact, though Alan is in charge (of course). Hawley Griffin becomes some other name entirely, perhaps another origin for legal reasons, I'm not sure. And the good Dr. Henry Jekyll doesn't show much in the clips, but there seems a bit of the terrible Edward Hyde there in the movie trailer.
I'm a visual guy, and the visuals look really good. Dark, moody, and a cross between Tim Burton and Disney's "20,000 Leagues" which is about right. But why they have to mangle the characters I don't know. And the film promo material gives us a huge glossy "LXG" to remember instead of an understated dark Victorian scroll of some kind. -sigh-
Mangling interpretations like this is why I don't care if SciFi ever does a mini-series for "Nine Princes in Amber."
In my Amber campaign metaphysics, there are eleven perceptions to the greatest sentients. Eleven senses. Eleven Primal powers for a foundation to the universe. For the first time anywhere, a sketch diagram. Click image to read skribble in 'first order font'. Note rotations around five sided figure. The larger text is ancient terms, the smaller text are "OOC meta-game terms".
A Point of Info :: I wouldn't be surprised if I start to go crazy as I show/sell a house, and figure out how to move a decade's junk, and watch them put together the new house. I know too much about putting houses together to watch it happen without obsessing on every little detail.
This blog may suffer for the next few months until... June? Unknown.
No Longer Strangers "All these series have a common theme - the main character often feeling lost and confused by ordinary problems or relationships and having some kind of 'superpower' whilst at the same time making great personal sacrifices and being first-class heroes who mostly go unrecognized by the general public. Are these series so popular because they touch a deep-seated feeling in the people who watch them?"
It is also a theme that touched me deeply in "Nine Princes in Amber." The idea that something intrinsic about you is worth creating havoc or destroying things to make sure you don't reach your potential. The idea that you may be bigger than you know or can imagine. The idea that you are safe unless you try to get out of your "assigned persona."
It seems to be true that the world will define you even as you wish to define yourself. Sometimes forces around you are stronger than your own insight into yourself.
There is another side to this that I learned as I got older and received promotions in business. You will be treated as your persona, not your self. People assign roles to co-workers and bosses. All of us are somewhat familiar with assuming a pleasant identity to work with others; our social masque. Teamwork. Cooperation. Social ease. But imagine if someone alters your masque and everyone then treats you differently. If someone writes "kick me" on your back, there is a classic response to this. If the majority of a work group decides you are the nicest person at the job, they treat you differently, even if you know you aren't the nicest person there by a long shot. If the organization writes "boss" on your masque, the work group will begin to treat you differently again. Same person, but now you are likely to be lumped in with "all bosses." And we know what bosses are like. This is a classic friction of promotion of status.
Likewise there are the comparisons. Someone at the office has to be the bad guy, even if that person is hardly as difficult to deal with as a real "bad guy". Someone will be "everyone's friend," someone will be the "ditz," and someone might be the "cypher." We like these archetypes and we use them as a shortcut to confirm our expectations of others. We map the world around us and part of that is the "consensus map" and that can be a cruel tyranny. This loss of individuality is often unfair and unwarranted. As someone involved with Human Resource issues every week, I've seen lots of mental stress generated when the group suddenly alters (often by gossip) your social masque and assigns you a change. It disturbs and appalls people. It can be a motive for leaving an otherwise wonderful job.
Safety within the social role, danger outside of it.
Myth challenge: Come up with a more mysterious and yet thrilling line than this:
"You can't win, Darth. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine." Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Star Wars, Episode IV: A New Hope"
Oh, what a lovely idea! Yes, my own not-for-profit publishing house (ShadowThriller Ideas) will shorty be showcasing these fine products suitable for every game:
Camera Obscura- tight focus on neighborhoods and cities. A sketch backdrop, but one with meat and research. So you have Camera Obscura: jazz Paris, or Camera Obscura: 1776, each of these would be a labor of love by an author who has spent some time digging up flavor and anecdotes about the people who live in the backdrop. This is a somewhat smaller scope than the GURPS supplements I love that try to do so much about a broad subject.
TransD Archetypes - another small series of books/pdf pamphlets that do for legends what 'Camera Obscura' does for setting: take on a classic myth-making archetype and explore it in closer detail, how friends, lovers, and siblings might tie into an archetype. How does the Reluctant Heroine fit into a story? How should the GM explore the backstory, or hook the character and plot together? Each product would have notes for different Player types, ie, explorer, tactician, immersive, etc. so the GM would have a yardstick for feedback from players.
Each item would come with some standard boilerplate refering to web pages where step by step conversion "how-tos" would be posted for various RPGs and such. Folks could contribute schemes for conversion or correspondence for their fav gaming systems.
Star Wars or Amber? Infinite RPing possibilities? The case for any creative story being the basis of a roleplaying game is rather simple but fraught with complications. When I was much (cough) younger, the landscape of books, movies, and TV were often the germ of a story that my sibs and I would "act out" unaware that we were playing roles but very aware we were emulating heroes.
We've seen Buffy, Farscape, and Doctor Who as RPing material; some with special systems to nail down their genre. We'll probably see a Harry Potter game soon.
So the first test is likely: did the story amaze and delight? I would think that Amber and Star Wars are damn fine material on this count. Zelazny and Lucas were both unable to avoid returning to the legend many times. Their personal visions of the material are well-documented. They both took possessive pride in the story, and fans of both regret the sequels in some cases.
There are other similarities. In fairness, perhaps there are always similarities in mass media stories about larger-than-life characters. Amber has infinite worlds. Star Wars has a galaxy far, far away. This allows gamers to strut their stuff, GMs to do permutations, and stories to be written across the large canvas.
What's the down side, if any?
Well, the canon is strong stuff and part of the attraction. Powerful enough to lock gamers into "more of the same." The story moves along so fast that only hints and actions illuminate the major characters. This means GM interpretation of archetypes. If the GM leans on these archetypes too much, the Players creativity will suffer. Players of both are willing to replay events from the canon. Players might actually desire the roles already established by the authors. Gamemasters might see new stories to be told away from the canon, or want to focus on politics, morality, philosophy, and history of both evocative backgrounds... but could become trapped by the material. In a game created from scratch, nothing is certain, in a genre sketched by a successful author, changing threads can disrupt the tapestry.
Amber has the scions of Oberon: powerful, contentious, and knowing strange powers.
Star Wars has the dark Sith: powerful, vicious, and knowing strange powers.
Amber has a range of cultures, powers, worlds, and motives, usually focused through the personal story of a gifted immortal.
Star Wars has a range of territories, technology, worlds, and motives, usually focused through the personal story of a gifted student of the Force.
Either can become a pale cartoon of the original if treated in cardboard fashion. In either, it might be inescapable that the stories of the Players get overshadowed by the material. As a novice GM might determine that "Brand is back," so it can be imagined that a GM could introduce a plot where "the Emperor isn't dead." (This was even done in a graphic series approved by Lucas. The Emperor had a clone ready to take his place if he died. If paid professionals can wheel out such an obvious story, why not your local game group?)
Genre material is what you make of it, what you bring to it, and how generous you are with your gaming group. But neither of these example licensed properties are easier to run than a scratch world where all is mystery and potential. I don't think any licensed property could be. There are pitfalls all about. Allowing the story to be driven by NPCs instead of PCs, having the GM become so enthused about the original material that no changes can be made to the canon, or even extending the stories past all published works but not bringing anything new to the material will have your creative Players asking, "what's the point?"
casting spoiler :: Buffy, the Vampire Slayer :: Sci Fi Wire
Firefly star Nathan Fillion is joining the cast of UPN's Buffy the Vampire Slayer for a key role in the series' final five episodes, Variety reported. Fillion will play Caleb, a former man of God who's turned to the dark side and now follows the First, the trade paper reported.
Perverse Access Memory:
WISH 37: Schedules and Circumstances How do you prioritize gaming in your life to make sure it happens on an ongoing basis? Are there circumstances or scheduling issues that make it more or less likely for you to participate in a gaming session or a campaign? How do you work around these issues, or can you?
(update: None of my experiences can be called typical for schedule and circumstance.)
Hmmm. I wonder how long I'll go on this one? Short answer is, making time for any hobby is hard because relationships to real people are demanding. (Un-needed aside: Planning and Discipline are in short supply for everyone these days.)
Long answer--- it's very hard to imagine I won't always have a game going. Even if I don't have an "official campaign" going, I'll take time out to roleplay with my S.O.. That kind of gaming doesn't require a schedule, though even then, a schedule helps to maintain focus.
When I first began gaming, we just played whenever the gamers were together, and since it was my brothers and sisters, it worked when we made it work. When I eventually found other people interested in my RPing hobby, it was the military, and weekends could be completely devoted to gaming. It saved money and trouble to know that a lot of your social time was preset to "gaming with the guys."
After the military, back in the real world, I went back to gaming with my brothers for many months before settling in my career town. During that time, I actually had some Army buddies drive or fly to my town to game again some of the campaign that we had in the Service. Where there is a will, there's a way. During those days, nothing much got in the way of gaming.
Let's just rush ahead to current day. I have one campaign, two PBEMs, one letter game. I've done a few one-shots with other gamers in town, that has never worked very well. Reasons? Mostly to do with quality. If I don't get an immediate thrill from a game situation, I'm not inclined to "tune in again." This applies to TV series and other repeat entertainments.
So I am mostly the architect of my own gaming schedule.
Once upon a time, gaming was players and donuts arriving at 9am Sunday morning every week, to go through the day until the dark of night, sometimes the dark of the next morning. This was at the height of my running D&D campaign in the 80's. Currently, we play in my Eternal City campaign every other Saturday, starting at 1pm (I jump in the car to fetch a Player at 1pm) and running until midnight, when I jump in the car to take the player home and get to bed about 1am. One or two stops for meals/munchies happen during the game. This schedule holds pending GM health or travel out of town or visiting guests.
Now most adult people I know say, "there is no way I could arrange my life to do 8+ hours of anything."
spoiler warnings :: Eternal City