8 thoughts on “GM technique”

  2. !!!

    The player of the Lurk in my game will be pleased. He kept driving home his Lurk just isn’t THAT rubbish at burglary. I think I got the tone right when I shifted the focus to happenstance, ill luck and other unknowns. It’s definitely a lesson I want to learn from. 

  4. I would add that you can always ask the Player why their Scoundrel failed (maybe from a list of options).

    Sometimes I’d want my character to fail, well not because of circumstance, but because of something within – it allows me to play out some inner turmoil that interests me as a player about my character.

    NB – Sean Nittner is a master of this technique in his portrayal of Arcy Keel.

  5. Nathan Roberts, I agree on all counts. We’re definitely on the same page. I love players owning and incorporating failure into their conception of their character. And this technique is totally complementary: players should be encouraged to step in and blame their characters’ weakness but the default should be, when nothing in particular inspires, that some unfortunate sequence of events is the cause for things going awry.

  6. Aw, thanks Nathan Roberts!

    I love and support all of this! The worst result is “I failed. I guess my character who is supposed to be awesome at this actually is incompetent at it. Why are we playing this game again?”

    I love finding the reasons (bad luck, circumstance, inner turmoil, etc) that a character fails and then discovering what they decide to blame for their failure (not always the same thing).

    Indiana Jones is a great example. He keeps swinging over pits, only to find dudes with spears on the other side. I think he rolled snake eyes.

    Han is great too. The best failed Circles roll ever was Han reaching out to Lando, only to find that Vader had gotten to him first.

    Okay, Harrison Ford just knows how to fail remarkably well 🙂

    As for where the source of failure comes from, I think those ideas can come from either the GM or the player, as long as they are following from the fiction and there is trust between them. John Harper wrote about this some time back over yonder: http://mightyatom.blogspot.com/2013/02/trust-in-me.html

  7. Just so!  A mere ‘whiff’ is the skill-based equivalent of ‘I hit him with my sword’.  ‘Tis a long habit some of us must unlearn, and a little disclaiming of decisions goes a long way.

    Indiana Jones, Han Solo, and the Art of Failing Forward.  Sounds like a self-help tome waiting to be inscribed.  (grin)

  8. This thread is GOLD! There should totally be a section in the book on the relationship between the players and the ‘conversation’ of play. I like the idea of mutable responsibilities of roles in play too – GM-full play.

    That little essay by John NEEDS to be paraphrased into the rules…. Just blame Luke for it anyways, I don’t think he ever trusted his GMs in the olden days 😉

    Edit: Actually the GM cheat sheet on p.24 of the playtest V4b is basically a summary of that earlier essay!

    Love it John.

Comments are closed.