GMing Basics - Unwritten

This week we're going back to the basics to talk about your players, and how important they are. Obviously you can't have a game without them, but there is much more to it than that.

In your games, usually the idea is that everyone wants to have fun. And unless your group plays the Tomb of Horrors over and over trying to get further, it probably happens. However, even with a great story and a memorable cast of NPCs, things can still go very poorly. The cast of players, not their characters but the players themselves, can make or break any game. Party Makeup is how I like to refer to this, although usually it refers to the in-game party, not the players themselves. I will be using it for both, although mostly out of character for this post.

The Party Makeup is insanely important because if everybody dislikes one guy you invited to tonight's game, before you know it there may be no more PCs in your future. Thankfully not all groups are that quick to draw their guns, but it is very important to listen to what kinds of people they want to have as other players. And if you're trying to get someone to join, tell everyone if they know them to make sure they're welcome. If they don't know the newcomer, maybe setup a meeting beforehand? I understand that's not always plausible, but with a newcomer nobody knows, generally it is better than inviting a friend to join without telling anyone. Although it seems like that shouldn't be the case, people hold grudges and biases that can be really halt games until the problem is dealt with.

If a player or players is/are unsure of someone you feel would be good in the group, talk with them. Make your points for why they would be decent in the group, and let your player(s) make their points as well. While a GM is in full control (to a degree) during any given game session, outside of those it usually isn't the case, and making it feel that way is generally a bad idea (With the sole exception of PARANOIA, THE BEST RPG IN ALPHA COMPLEX, CITIZEN). On the flip side, if a player feels that someone you or they know could be good in your group, try to be receptive. If it's a friend, then you can talk about why s/he could or could not fit into the group. If it isn't a friend, then it's much more of a risk, but can definitely pay off. I've done all of these, and the results have been varied, all dependent on the people invited, and not the method used.

However, sometimes bad things do occur - Maybe a player got upset because the Cleric stole their thunder (literally?) in the last battle, or because you ruled in someone else's favor. No matter the case, it is your job as the leader of the group to settle things. I want to be clear though, I mean this all out of game. Even if normally you aren't leading the group of friends, if someone gets a call and starts crying off in the corner, you as the GM need to understand it's your job to help work things out where you are, perhaps by taking a break. You don't need to have nightly conversations with the player with issues, but when people at your table need you to control the situation, it is your job to. If two players are having a problem, you need to be able to sit with both of them and talk it out, ideally as the neutral party between them. If a mutual agreement can't be found with honesty on both sides, then something needs to happen. Maybe someone needs to leave the group, quite possibly one of them has to take a break or make a new character, all depending on the issue, but the key point here is that you need to try to settle problems between players, hopefully with everyone acting like mature adults about the issues at hand.

This isn't really something people can get around. The GM is naturally seen as the leader in most every tabletop role-playing group I've ever seen. And it may take some time to get used to the role. Yes, these are unwritten rules, and no, they aren't fair - I mean you need to plan for the session, plan the where, when, and who, bring materials, make rulings, deal with the universal problem player, AND help the guy with his issues which happened when you were supposed to be playing your game to have some fun?

When you do a good job helping out your players, they will begin to understand that you're willing to help them, and that you're there for them. It makes a great GM/player bond that can translate into friendship if you're not at an all-friends gaming table, or an even stronger friendship than before. And perhaps your players might understand and be grateful, and be there for you when you need someone to be in charge while you freak out for a little bit. It's all depends on them and you, and how the relationship morphs and evolves. Maybe they'll learn how to handle it with your guidance when they finally take the dive and try GMing that system they always go one and on about?

Take pride in your duties though, and try your best to help out your players in their time of need. Whether it's with a player having problems with how another players acts, or maybe someone wants to join but you know they aren't a good fit with the other players in the group, it's your responsibility to handle things like these as a mature GameMaster. The pressure might be high, but these things come up randomly, and you need to be able to deal with them. Before and after sessions issues like these are less of a priority, but while you're in charge people look up to you for guidance, so reassure them in stride with your actions for the betterment of your friends and group.

May your players never quarrel, and your rules be clear-cut and easy to grasp,

Taylor Shuss

NPC-Crafting

Welcome back to another article that will ideally help your GMing skills. This week I'm going to talk about how to make good NPCs, not in a mechanical sense but as characters the players like, care for, and remember. This is very tricky and not a science, so some of my advice on this matter may not fit with how your group approaches people/things. I would also like to note this for your more run-of-the-mill folk, not the main villain of a campaign, which is another topic I definitely want to cover sooner or later.

Let's make a list that most memorable NPCs have or need to work:

• Some sort of quirk, or character defining trait that removes them from the bulk of nameless NPCs
• Relatability, that is the ability for the PCs to talk to and communicate with him/her/it.
• Ideally has similar goals to the PCs, or is at least willing to help them along the way to the PC's goals.

Think about a movie, say Disney's Aladdin, and then think about the most memorable NPC in said movie (of course trying to specify who is a PC and an NPC). I'd probably say that the Genie is the most memorable one, and I'd definitely qualify him as an NPC because he has either way too much power for a PC, or due to how few times he gets to do what he wants to do (which is important that players get to do within reason). What separates him from the other people in Agrabah? Well he isn't a human, he's a genie. He has no free will and must obey his current master. He can also grant wishes, not to mention I'd say he has the best song in the movie. So he has a lot going for him on the side of "Stuff Most NPCs Don't Do."

To continue on that train of thought, the genie sits down and talks with the protagonist about how hard life is being a genie allowing the audience and Aladdin to see that although he is a magical being, he has problems just like the rest of us. A good NPC can talk with the players and feel like a real person, although that depends on what style of game you're running. An RPG based on serious film noir doesn't want cartoon characters running around (unless it's the Roger Rabbit RPG) because that would ruin the theme, just as a character with severe depression would hurt the mood of a game based on the Animaniacs.

I would say this is the most arguable here, as sometimes NPCs who are actively working against the players can be likable, even lovable, if done right. But in general, many beloved NPCs work with, or for, the players and their goals. I would probably say a large factor in this part of it all is how experienced the group you're playing with is, as many newer groups tend to jump to violence as the answer because it's all new to them and they can do WHATEVER they want in this world. Whereas older, more seasoned players tend to talk diplomacy and peace before gunning down people who would try to stop the party.

With all this information I would like to reiterate - Sometimes players just kill that really cool NPC before s/he has a chance to shine and prove themselves. Just keep on running the game, and remember you can always throw the NPC back in because players don't know what you never described. You shouldn't always do that, but it is definitely an option if you feel it's truly that important.

Don't forget to throw in random details for the PCs to latch onto. You can expand on these as the party asks more about them, adding depth to the NPC. When I describe a group of NPCs, it's generally best to describe the most notable people and see where they go from there (although that can easily change depending on what exactly they're looking for). This allows you plenty of options without having to worry about every last detail, although there are times when the party splits into 3rds and talks to all three of the NPCs you mentioned. So I suppose it may not be a perfect method, depending on your style and quickness, but it tends to work well for me.

I hope you found this helpful, and please feel free to message me or comment on this if you feel I missed something. If you want to hear about specific topics, commenting works.

May Trenk, Jenky, and Chubbs live on in memory alone,

Taylor Shuss

GMing Basics

Today I'm going to talk about the most important part of GMing, in my opinion. I know some who prefer crunch over fluff, and others who try to get the crunch to fit how the lore works as accurately as possible. I recall others who want to make each party question their ideals, and others who just enjoy throwing shit in the group's face. None of these are as important to me as planning.

No, I don't mean planning out the campaign's villain's backstory, the session, or a certain story arc. I mean figuring out when and where you and your 5 other friends can all meet up, relax for a few hours, and play the damn game.

Don't get me wrong, other bits are pretty important too, but I consider planning the when and where a serious and important issue because without those figured out you will probably never have a game, no matter how well you know the system, or how perfect your story is, you need to know when you're playing and where.

Many moons ago, when I was new to tabletop role-playing games, the group I was in wouldn't plan their sessions out. Instead, they would hang out, see if anyone wanted to play D&D or what have you, and if enough people were down for it the game would go on.

This was in probably the worst stage of mine, as a player of pen and paper RPGs, because I was what's known as a player (A joke, I swear...) Looking back, I am surprised at how often they played, but the real issue was continuity. New campaigns would spring up sporadically, and old ones would almost never get finished. As a new player at the time, it took me awhile to get that what we were doing wasn't the norm, and after a time the inevitable happened. I got lucky and was able to DM before it fell to bits, thus leading me to making my own group shortly thereafter. But looking back, the constant flow of new games being run did help me in one big way - I got pretty decent at making characters.

Any given GM must also take note of another planning issue that can come up. You can only have so much of a time gap between games before most groups get bored of, or forget about, your campaign. I would argue no matter how interesting your story (or theirs, rather) was, a good month or two without any gaming can kill about most groups. This can change, depending on how much the people talk about it, but it all comes down to a simple point: Work with your players, and be open about scheduling to try and work things out.

I remember when half of my first D&D group, the one I first full-timed DM for, got seasonal jobs including me, I talked with everyone and we wrote up a schedule. It seemed that nobody could play for a while month! I said no, look right here, and they noticed right after work, at 3AM to 6AM we could play, and we played all but one week out of that month. It was tiring, and the sessions could have been better, but we all still kept on playing thanks to decent planning abilities.

I've seen groups that have a player who schedules things, and the DM just follows those instructions. While that may work, I find it less than attractive primarily because ideally the GM is the most invested in any given game - it's his or her world, that s/he put a lot of effort into making and letting players run through. With that logic, the GM will care the most, and will prioritize getting everyone together and playing. I'm not saying that a player-scheduled can't work, I just feel it may not be the most optimal setup. If you find a way for it to work, more power to you.

So remember, no matter how annoying it is to have to set everything up, and make sure everything is fine with everyone, it's all worth it. Without that seemingly annoying task out of the way, there would be no game, no wizards and dragons to challenge your friends.

On a side note though, I would like to say that it's also important not to force a game. By that I mean, make sure people can reliably go to your game. If not, you're asking for trouble. Just wait a month or two. I know that can be difficult, but your amazing story will probably get derailed anyways so just cool down, work on the nearby civilizations or what kind of wildlife is in the area. The wait is usually worth it.


I plan on seeing you next week,
Taylor Shuss

The Player Who Could

Hello and welcome to my blog. I'm going to share stories, tips, and other things here. Although the focus is on GMing, I may drift into board games once in a while.

For my first post, I am going to regale my best, proudest moment as a DM to you, and talk about what lessons can be learned from it.

This event happened years ago, back when I was content with only running one game a week, and when I was content with only running fantasy games. I had 5, maybe 6, players who I really enjoyed playing with. One of them, Kyle, was a pretty cool guy. He's long gone now, moved away and got married, but his impact is something I'll make sure to never forget.

So the party had just arrived at a new town, a town that was celebrating some big victory or some-such. The party noticed a Grey Render outside of the town, and was pulled into the party the town was throwing. There were stands with free meat, fruits, ale, water, everything a party could really want in the ways of hospitality. They were told of a great victory long ago, of the town's men attacked and slaughtered a group of evil octopus-people to the West. One of the party was told of a few people who had gone missing recently, but dismissed it as nothing. Most of the group got drunk and passed out, and one of them found himself being carried west-ward by the Grey Render, to supposed protector of the town. Said member discovered a lone mindflayer out in what seemed to be an old cavern of sorts, with a few human cohorts, all under his command.

Another party member woke up in the middle of the night, and discovered his travelling companion missing. After alerting the others, they found the rather large footprints headed West and followed them. They arrived at the mindflayer's lair, and he paralyzed them while explaining that although they had found him, he was going to slowly ruin the town by making them all his slaves as revenge for destroying his brethren. Some of the members of the party managed to get out of his mind-controlling clutches, and he escaped via Grey Render. They watched as his slave carried him over the nearby mountains, easily escaping the party's reach.

A few sessions later, the party had a new friend, an old man. They came across what looked like a mine, but as they went further in the mine became a sort of dungeon. The party, and the old man, got through the dungeon and found what looked like a slide downwards. There were three slides, and after Kyle went down one bravely (they thought they were trapped, not that I blame them) he saw an incredibly long hallway, filled with three rows of people of many different races in robes, all drawing some symbols on the ground beneath them, chanting altogether. At the end of the hallway was a mindflayer.Then the following series of events happened.

Kyle: Alright,  I'm gonna run up to one of the robed guys and see what kind of symbols he is making.
Me: Okay, roll SpellCraft.
Kyle: 17, 22.
Me: You look them over and can clearly make out that the man is drawing Necromantic symbols.
Kyle: Aw crap, guys I know what he's doing! He's going to resurrect his old mindflayer friends if we don't figure out a way to stop him ASAP!

I was pretty taken aback. It's like he read my mind, but he just used his head and figured it out. I know it's not a crazy conclusion, but players and DMs tend to think of different wavelengths in my experience, so having a player just GET it like Kyle did was amazing to me.

How can this be applied to your GMing? Well first of all, don't expect the vast majority of your players to figure out what's going on, or why it's going on like my friend Kyle did. Expect your players not to pick up on many clues you drop because they're focused on other things. Whether or not the other things are their cell phones or Grimlak's answer to their duel invitation is for another time, but players have a hard time seeing things as clearly as you do. Because of this, feel free to drop a few more clues than one might expect, because odds are they won't notice, or even care, about them all.

Secondly, although it's harder to show the players what's going on, it is more rewarding to the player (and in my opinion to the GM) when they figure it out themselves. It gives a sense of pride, a reason to be more invested in the outcome of things. I mean, would your players care more about a treasure map they were asked to look into by a friend, or one they found, deciphered, and barely got out alive with while exploring other ruins? So remember, whenever possible - Show, don't tell.

This first article is hopefully helpful, and if you want to leave feedback that'd be much appreciated. The ending to the story may be told in another article, as I can definitely find a lesson to be learned there as well.

Best of luck story-crafting,
Taylor Shuss