Deep Geek (Very Long)

This post is about different perspective of gaming. There is a 10+ year generation gap. Also it is me being a prick and bugging some guys to talk about their gaming. It guarantee it will be very boring if you're not the type to be take gaming a little too seriously. I want this around for posterity.

reply to Before any Sci-fi.

My take on your piece is that you have your playing/GM style which is quite different from ours. You want things ordered and pre-arranged. We on the other hand have adopted the fly by the seat of our pants style. We don't need all specifics all the time. We need the background, yes, but it is kept in the background. We hate micromanagement because it tends to bog down the game and leads to early GM burnout. The reason we keep things cloudy is that it gives us leeway to steer the story the players are creating to keep the game enjoyable for all. Besides, another GM might want to come along and take over for a spell. The canvas is big and there is nothing in the rules that says the somebody owns the Universe. Usually in a Science Fiction setting we rarely encounter high government. Most encounters will be bureaucrats of high level sometimes but most of the time are low level that just want some things done. And the Players are just the tools for the job. Of course the GM might wish to use the Listed/Canonical Royalty as Patrons but that is more of an exception than a rule.

Just my thoughts on what I interpret from your writing. No offense meant.

XXXXX

My reply is the Italicized Gray, his reply after is the Bold.

> None Taken, I'm actually happy you responded.

Intellectual exercise. Don't call someone with an idea crazy until you
know they are.

That was my idea at the time I posted it. Although much of my focus is not pre-arranged encounters, but pre-arranged expectations. I'm not also about micro-management, but players understanding that there are limits to what the GM can prepare in a given amount of time and GMs not getting carried away with their expectations and efforts.

Everybody has different definitions of micromanagement. See, your example at the bottom is one to me.

> Cloudy is ok, depending on what is kept cloudy. In other words, what is certain is that the PCs are free to do what they think best in the situation and what is most fun, challenging and exciting.

Agree with that.

> The problem i see is that, we've matured to a level of gaming that illusions the GM creates is getting easier and easier to overcome and the game has changed in a way that it competes with many forms of escapist mediums. What shows for its constant crucial strength is the time pressured critical thinking and cooperative environment towards a goal. Creating the escapist illusion may not be enough, especially when real life catches up on the players. What I anticipate (probably incorrectly) is the game becoming a great medium enhance decision making and adaptive thinking in a cathartic medium no other medium can emulate.
>
> This is why I began from options and moved towards analyzing the initial and unwritten social contract of the GM and Players and getting that contract more clear and concise. In that way the Players and Gm have their own checks and balances and the reason we keep things "cloudy" is acceptable even if the veil of the GM thins, because there is an understanding that the experience is the core of the game, it reinforces the reason behind taking a role (self imposed limitation on options so that the player will be challenged to think through the limitations of their own character's motives and abilities).

Which is why the contract was to play in a Traveller millieu. This has some handwave pseudoscience to allow adventures to happen. But there are limits that can be placed, be they economic, social, mental, technological or physical for the Players to overcome. To me its like
playing a puzzle albeit one where we can shape the pieces to our liking, sometimes with High Explosives.

> its basically a Riddle with no single answer. People can keep making riddles and they can keep improving their own thinking processes through challenging the riddles of others. The difference is that RPGs have, IMO, a better feedback mechanism and a more controls by which to facilitate it.
>
> Science Fiction has a lot of options, to ignore certain options is a voluntary choice on the part of the GM and players. The thing is, typically these expectations are not immediately made known to new players and sometimes, we forget the self imposed limitations and get carried away by it. Personally, I
find myself at fault at that in the last traveller game. Although i think it was something worth learning and understanding to develop a better and more sustainable way of running a game.
>
> If I could understand how burn outs happen, anticipate it, and prevent it; Or understand why a game was sustainable for a long time compared to another game that sputtered and died; or how one game sucked and anther was a success; Maybe It would be possible to understand enough to a point developing key principles in making a more sustainable and maxed out fun game.

Heh, it happens to all sooner or later. REAL LIFE is one that really burns out the GM or Players without being in the game.

> Looking at the past game. Maybe we could have made a compromise and communicated better with what the GM wanted and what we wanted. Also we could have cut back with the complicated and undramatic rolls. We could have focused on fewer characters, so that the GM had to only prepare "dramatic" scenes catered to the strength of the key characters.
>
> Also, managing what the players expected in the game: like trivialities screwing the Players when they are not their Characters (who are professional adventurers) and have only theoretical notions of what they can do. There should not be an open ended time for planning: there should be a budget time and the PCs (and not the Players) are expected to have covered all the basics. The Players on the mean time tackle the more important and crucial decisions and how they execute their plans and they do this In character. Players shouldn't be the one shooting themselves in the foot with their plans, instead the set up maleable and the Players can are given the opportunity *by murphy to adapt to the unanticipated elements of the execution.
>
> This could have been communicated quiet easily since a game is a peer to peer activity. The authority of the GM is based on the amount of fun the players and GM want to have out of the experience.
>
> ex.
> Players plan to assault an enemy hide out. The GM makes a secret strategy roll, the result highlights X out of 5 crucial options and risks to the players (a strategy roll may never reveal 100% of options and risks).
>
> The Players formulate a plan in a budget of 10-15mins. The GM listens in to this and notes the possible resolution time, consequences and possible murphies. If the plan is complex, the GM should consider calling for a break to breakdown the encounter into more manageable pieces. On break Players should load up their characters and allow for flexibilities in their plans.
>
> After the budget, the Team leader positions everyone and the GM commences the encounter.
>
> The GM is free to throw a Murphy, depending on the situation and the secret roll. The Players should expect to adapt to the situation. The encounter takes 45m-1 hour to resolve segment before the GM calls for a break for collecting his notes, thoughts, and planning the next moves. After all encounters are resolved, then aftermath.
>
> This example is subject to change and further improvements and tests by the GM and players. Until both parties reach optimal satisfaction. Rinse wash and repeat.
>
This is micromanagement to me. If I were the GM I would present the scenario, let the Players make their plans, and just enjoy the die rolls. Sure I made a defensive plan. Sure I planned a few surprises.
But I, as the GM choose spontaneous responses to the Players' plan. I know that no matter what I think they will do they will do what I didn't think of. There is the axiom that if you Fail to Plan then you Plan to Fail. The other one is that you make your plans but expect them to fail and make plans on that. Strike, parry, counter strike, block, thrust, BOOM!!!!!!

Micro management, well your plan is essentially the same, except that there is no feedback mechanism in order to improve it over time. Thats the key difference in my opinion. IMO Escalation is part of gaming and players will always be wanting more and more, after every time they feel that they have achieved a level of mastery over the situation.

I see you want to think of it simply and keep it the way you've played it for the longest time. There is nothing wrong with that. In fact if your players like that then all the better. The thing that is different between having developed
"micromanagement" and keeping to the same system time in and out is adaptation.

Games escalate, people grow, life gets tough, etc. I know its just an catharsis, but to some people it is the most rewarding catharsis and they raise the stakes when they master a particular situation. The merits of how you used to like a game is perfect for the people who have the same expectations but these are only going to be old friends and life long associates. The basic system will not prove as resilient with strangers or people who did not grow up playing with the same gm (or in essence with much different expectations).

Although, I wonder if games become as routine and partially predictable that it would be better to just grab a drink with old pals instead of prepping for a game? Please understand I come from a mindset of escalation: of how things can
be better, how to adapt, and how to improve. I'm not that sentimental about my old gaming days, because I know I can't ever repeat the initial thrill when i was new to it and its the past, and I can't reclaim it in anyway no matter how
devotedly I hold on to the tradition. All i can do is work to achieving it again by using what I've learned in Real Life and exploring it with other who are just as interested to explore with me.

As an exercise of adaption and critical thinking, discussing what everyone perceives in their game is particularly very useful in learning where has the game gone in their lives and analyzing how better to be more efficient in the

Again, no offense meant but this is all very wordy, long and nice. But the question remains: when's the next game? For me, all the theory does not equate to a kick ass game. A kick ass game is a game where i have fun and want to come back for more.

As i aged (perhaps too much for my own good), i now feel that gaming is just that: GAMING. its a hobby, i go to a game (like some people go to basketball) play and go home. there are good days and bad days. the important thing is since kulang na kulang yung time to game ko (i dont have enough time to game), i make the most out of it (even if not all my players including myself! ae fully familiar with the system all its nuances).

once we agree on something to game - we GO! i don't wish for extreme depths of serendipity or historical greatness or other heights of rolee playing now. all i want is a good kick as game and then i can go home. part of the fun is hanging around and kulitan with the guys.

i don't really go beyond this and into theory anymore. i noticed that 99% of the time, my players don't really care. they're just there to be entertained, to entertain themselves and others and have a good time. even if its (admittedly) rather mababaw (shallow) like a (seemingly) meaningless dungeon crawl (see the monster- kill the monster-get his loot), it works for me and mine.

ganun nalang.

My withdrawn reply:

It is a hobby, others are more crazy about it, others couldn't care less. I admit, I can see its not that much of a big deal anymore. I've actually not been playing myself, because I'm more interested talking about stuff than going through the prep time.

Yet, at my age it would suck to take it easy. I mean, I'm still in my most productive years so its time to play hard and work hard while I don't need too much medical upkeep.

Of course I see how the games go for other groups. My other friends just want to hang out and not to game anymore. I don't mind, in fact, I like it cause we all get more talking time and we can try to provoke each other with something to think about.

I've become more self-conscious of the place of everything in my own life. I can't just have a hobby, everything has to by synergistic, everything has to promote adaptability, keeps my mind sharp, challenges me and forces me to reconsider everything I've previously assumed. I see how it is people don't want to adapt and that's many of the justifications I hear from people who work with corruption: "its just easier this way".

Conclusion: Its clear there is a generational gap. There is also a clear difference in life perspective. One is more pessimistic (and dare I say realistic), the other is more optimistic*. In such discussions, one side is proposing the others side has already made up its mind. There is simply no point.

What's to be gained? I'm shooting my mouth off to these guys to find fun in a challenge when life has beaten them bloody. Although, in life Hope is a delusion, because we cannot in all accuracy depend on the chance of hope yet we still cling on to it. I'm a firm believer in hope and know this is a delusion I'd gladly cling on too because to do otherwise is basically the end of life.

Given the discussion, I'll just conceded to their "wisdom". Its plain I tried to make it clear and careful not to be thought of that I didn't think this through (because that is the nature when older people listen people much younger than themselves) of course conceding doesn't make their point right and basically means I just gave up on them.

That's the thing I'm most afraid about when it comes to people, I'd rather they fight me than give up on me. Sure, I gave up on these guys (heck they wanted it can you hear the thick tone of "STFU already!"). Thankfully this fear is pretty healthy and allows me to be dynamic. Imagine If I were a parent and the HUGE age gap I would have with my teen age kid, I don't want a repeat of what I and my brothers went through with my parents: I don't want to assume what kind of problem immediately and just throw what every crack-pot idea that comes in my way to fix it. I will be adaptable and try to understand them and keep trying to communicate and figure out whats wrong and why I can't understand.

If I can live up to that promise 15-20 years from now then I'm gold. Strangely my wife and I are pretty confident of the future, come to think of it adapt or screw up. Games have made me love adapting, in the most very essence of being a gamer- min/max your own life and get ready for adventure.

Current Reading: Reading my fav-book, I was wondering why some bosses cannot stand finding out negatives when they need to find it out as early as possible. The anecdote about the american subcompact car trying to compete with the japanese. I mean WTF, why can't they take the bad news? You can guess my answer here so I won't spell it out. Seriously, once you stop adapting you slowly die. I'd like to be just like the DnD Dragons, as they get older they just get more bad-a$$.


*although I wouldn't personally describe it as that, but lets shut up from dragging it too long.