Gamesmaster character play

[psychohist]

Ed Chauvin IV:

Why would/should a "good" GM not identify with his
character and/or be emotionally invested in them?

I think it stems from the powers the gamesmaster has to determine what
happens in the game world, and the associated responsibilities to be
objective.

In the case of antagonist characters - characters against which the
player characters are supposed to fight - identifying with or being
emotionally invested in the antagonists may result in a temptation to
fudge things in those antagonists' favor. This can be particularly
insidious if the game is set up in a way where the gamesmaster can
fudge things without realizing it, thinking that he is being
objective. While few gamesmasters actually cause such antagonists to
win - the game wouldn't last long in that case - I've seen a fair
number of cases where the gamesmaster repeatedly save particular
antagonists to fight again another day, even when the player
characters have been clever enough to set up a situation that should
not allow for escape.

It's less of an issue in the case of characters who are on the player
characters' side, but even there, the temptation can be to create a
story around the gamesmaster character, rather than allowing the
player characters to drive the action during play sessions.

Warren J. Dew

[psychohist]

Ed Chauvin IV:

Why would/should a "good" GM not identify with his
character and/or be emotionally invested in them?

I think it stems from the powers the gamesmaster has to determine what
happens in the game world, and the associated responsibilities to be
objective.

In the case of antagonist characters - characters against which the
player characters are supposed to fight - identifying with or being
emotionally invested in the antagonists may result in a temptation to
fudge things in those antagonists' favor. This can be particularly
insidious if the game is set up in a way where the gamesmaster can
fudge things without realizing it, thinking that he is being
objective. While few gamesmasters actually cause such antagonists to
win - the game wouldn't last long in that case - I've seen a fair
number of cases where the gamesmaster repeatedly save particular
antagonists to fight again another day, even when the player
characters have been clever enough to set up a situation that should
not allow for escape.

It's less of an issue in the case of characters who are on the player
characters' side, but even there, the temptation can be to create a
story around the gamesmaster character, rather than allowing the
player characters to drive the action during play sessions.

Warren J. Dew

[gleichman]

Post by psychohist
It's less of an issue in the case of characters who are on the player
characters' side, but even there, the temptation can be to create a
story around the gamesmaster character, rather than allowing the
player characters to drive the action during play sessions.

As a side note, and sort of connected to a post I just made in another
thread...

As I understand your style in gaming, you're very much aiming for
"this is what would happen". It would seem that a possible result of
that is the occurance of NPCs instead of players driving the action or
at least major decisions. Am I reading your style wrong on this point?
Or do the players themselve manage it by moving outside the influence
of such NPCs (much like the self-employeed move outsite the reach of
the Boss).

[gleichman]

Post by psychohist
It's less of an issue in the case of characters who are on the player
characters' side, but even there, the temptation can be to create a
story around the gamesmaster character, rather than allowing the
player characters to drive the action during play sessions.

As a side note, and sort of connected to a post I just made in another
thread...

As I understand your style in gaming, you're very much aiming for
"this is what would happen". It would seem that a possible result of
that is the occurance of NPCs instead of players driving the action or
at least major decisions. Am I reading your style wrong on this point?
Or do the players themselve manage it by moving outside the influence
of such NPCs (much like the self-employeed move outsite the reach of
the Boss).

[gleichman]

Post by psychohist
It's less of an issue in the case of characters who are on the player
characters' side, but even there, the temptation can be to create a
story around the gamesmaster character, rather than allowing the
player characters to drive the action during play sessions.

As a side note, and sort of connected to a post I just made in another
thread...

As I understand your style in gaming, you're very much aiming for
"this is what would happen". It would seem that a possible result of
that is the occurance of NPCs instead of players driving the action or
at least major decisions. Am I reading your style wrong on this point?
Or do the players themselve manage it by moving outside the influence
of such NPCs (much like the self-employeed move outsite the reach of
the Boss).

[gleichman]

Sorry about the mult-posts. Google news was claiming they failed.

Bad week for software.

[psychohist]

Brian Gleichman asks me:

As I understand your style in gaming, you're
very much aiming for "this is what would happen".
It would seem that a possible result of
that is the occurance of NPCs instead of players
driving the action or at least major decisions. Am
I reading your style wrong on this point?

You are not reading it wrong.

However, there is some freedom in what events to allow to happen "off
stage", so to speak, and what events to focus on during actual play
sessions. I prefer for the play sessions to focus more on player
characters.

It's also true, as you suggest, that the player characters do tend to
seek out situations where they are their own bosses.

Warren J. Dew

[gleichman]

Post by psychohist
However, there is some freedom in what events to allow to happen "off
stage", so to speak, and what events to focus on during actual play
sessions. I prefer for the play sessions to focus more on player
characters.
It's also true, as you suggest, that the player characters do tend to
seek out situations where they are their own bosses.

This makes sense, especially the first part. Too often people confuse
the concept of focus with simulation.