Quote from: Fiasco;454845You have limited your argument to a very narrow range of gaming scenarios. Yes, maybe if you are running a high level, high intrigue game in say a metropolis, handing over might be a little more challenging.  But you know, as in my example, there are many types of campaigns that can be tailor made for multiple GMs where this isn't an issue at all.  Like my one, for instance, where every adventure is in a different part of the world.  The only consistent NPC is the evil wizard.  Its not as hard as you would like to make out.

I agree, that is the kind of thing that, if you were to have a multiple-GM campaign, would be an ideal kind of scenario: two different areas of the same game world; you have your GM for the "western region" and your GM for the "eastern region" or whatever, and events from one end up affecting the other.  Players would also likely play two different sets of characters..

RPGPundit

Again, I don't see why it should be a problem. As long as the GMs keep a good line of communication and are not dicks, things should work out well.

Quote from: RPGPundit;454709It would be very hard for me. I can't imagine myself being able to correctly express the psychological makeup of hundreds of NPCs, or the details about secret plot developments I have going on in my mind, to a "Co-GM".   What's more, I would be humble enough to doubt that I could do justice to his vision either.

It just seems that in each case, unless you're doing one of those "you write a sentence then I write a sentence" type of exercises in making up a nonsense world as you go along, the end product is going to be nothing but the ruining of potential brilliance.

RPGPundit

From what I gather (I have a tiny experience co-GMing) the efficient mindset for this game style is:
Do not prepare too much, flexibility matters most. Co-GMs should abide guidelines but it would be counter-productive to describe minute details about NPCs for instance. Co-GMs should be able to soar from the guidelines, not get bogged down by the 200 pages about the royal family of Aaaargh written last weekend by their obsessive fellow GM. Co-GMs should synchronize often in order to present a coherent world in motion. But above all co-GMs have to accept there's going to be blank pages in the setting they're collaborating on. They have to accept someone else filling those blanks.

I'm not surprised you react negatively to this game style: this sharing of GM responsibilities bares similarities with story-gaming, at least the part where authority about the setting is shared among people.        

But it doesn't have to be this way. When you roll on a random table, for a treasure, an encounter or something else, you don't feel like you're loosing the ability to GM, right? It's more like: "the PCs have gone off track, I have no idea what should be behind that hill, I might as well get inspired by a random table"   There's a little bit of risk doing this. The roll might choose something you have a hard time fitting with the rest of your game ("really? a gang of pirates? in the mountain?") but many GMs find it's worth the pain. The use of random tables brings fresh stuff to your game. Stuff you wouldn't come up with on your own. Maybe co-GMing is a bit like that, like using a random table on anything that was left vague during the game preparation?

Well, its more like "using random tables and spending half the time with some dude who isn't nearly as good as I am trying to run the world".

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;455097Well, its more like "using random tables and spending half the time with some dude who isn't nearly as good as I am trying to run the world".

RPGPundit

Or somebody of comparable skill. There might even be synergy between the tow GMs' strong points.

If you have an ironclad conviction that any given GM necessarily "isn't nearly as good" as you are, that's going to cause problems. But some groups have benefited from the GMs collaborating, even without a lead or director GM. The integrity of the GM's singular vision for the campaign world isn't paramount in the ability of the GM to GM. It really just isn't. I am not talking about some kind of storytelling shared narrative authority nonsense - when the GM hits the table, he is the GM. But the ability to cooperate and to use others' input in a constructive way are important skills in the GM skillset, the leadership skillset, and the adult social behavior skillset.

Several people have helped run a multiple GM campaign and had good experiences doing it. You can tell yourself that it's rose colored glasses, or that it would have been 'better yet' with one GM, no matter the other circumstances, knock yourself out, discount any evidence that doesn't fit your theory. I've also got this great dissertation on bat weiners you might like.

Multi GM campaigns work best in campaigns designed for multiple GMs. Simple, really. It also helps when people are mature and don't shoot from the ego. The GM's authority is paramount as for a regular campaign. It's just that the person with the title changes more frequently.

Some people get a little precious about GMing. More people can do a good job of it than they might like to think...

Perhaps I should say "nearly as good at running the world the way I run it".  The issue to me is that you are ultimately engaging in a compromise of your style.  I can accept that for some that is not necessarily a big deal, and it can be more or less so depending on who they're doing it with, but in my case at least I can't envision anyone to do it with that it wouldn't feel like it was "cramping my style".

The only way I could imagine doing this is some kind of exercise in shared-world creation, or an aforementioned separation of the world into different "autonomous GMing regions" with probably what is closer to two simultaneous campaigns being run in different parts of the same world.  Something like that could potentially be interesting.

RPGPundit

I just turned over my game to our most novice GM and made a character. Its the E6 Greek and Persian setting I'd been working on for quite a while. For sure, E6 is easier to run for the novice than normal D&D.

That said, all of the structure, house rules, NPCs and cities I'd written up and that this player was familiar with I think really helped him feel more comfortable GMing. I still helped him put together his game, but I've never seen this guy manage to run a game without crashing and burning.

I was nervous for him because the people he was running for were mostly all real experienced players and one or two of them can be difficult people. It turned out beautiful though. He pulled it all together and ran a really entertaining game.

So this might be another reason for the rotating GM - to create a set of training wheels for a novice GM so that he can get practice and feel more confident people are going to be behind it.

Well, that's an interesting report, Cranewings. But sorry, were you just letting him run one session; or was this a permanent hand-over of the campaign to him? Or will you be alternating?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;455845Well, that's an interesting report, Cranewings. But sorry, were you just letting him run one session; or was this a permanent hand-over of the campaign to him? Or will you be alternating?

RPGPundit

I originally brought it up as temporary, sense no one liked the idea. I did want out because of pressure at school. It went well enough that he is going to take it for a few months. People got pretty attached to there characters and I think I was right in guessing that those characters were more important than who is moderating them.

A guy that I gamed with in the Navy told me about how his original group did a Shared game. This was AD&D in the late-70's to mid-80's in San Diego. Each GM had his own game world and the PCs would play in one world for an adventure or two and then when they were switching GMs they would encounter something (magic portal/obelisk/whatever) that would transport them to the next GM's world and have an adventure there. So, effectively, you had parallel worlds running at the same time and Characters going from world to world on an adventure.

Like I said before, there's many ways to do it, just because you can't conceive of it working doesn't mean that it is crap...

We had our third session with the GM that took over my game. I'm helping him less and less. His game has been pretty good.

I guess like a lot of novice GMs, he is shaky at the start of the game but once he gets into a groove it goes pretty well.

I think one of the biggest problems is ownership of the game. I originally advised him to try to keep what I wrote the same and work with it or fill in the gaps. He's really been keeping the party off the beaten path, I think because of it. That advice was a mistake and I should have really relinquished creative control off the bat.

Quote from: Cranewings;459172We had our third session with the GM that took over my game. I'm helping him less and less. His game has been pretty good.

I guess like a lot of novice GMs, he is shaky at the start of the game but once he gets into a groove it goes pretty well.

I think one of the biggest problems is ownership of the game. I originally advised him to try to keep what I wrote the same and work with it or fill in the gaps. He's really been keeping the party off the beaten path, I think because of it. That advice was a mistake and I should have really relinquished creative control off the bat.

What game are you running again - is this pathfinder E6? What kind of setting - and is he mostly running in a separate region?

Quote from: Cole;459173What game are you running again - is this pathfinder E6? What kind of setting - and is he mostly running in a separate region?

This is my greek / persian iron age E6/ Super Heroes Pathfinder setting I developed for the map Silver Lion did. When I was running, the party traveled up the Royal Road through Zathurm (Persia) as merchants to the Legus Atturim (Athenian League) city of Sikyon, on the boarder with Zathurm. The new guy has kept the game in Sikyon, using a few of the NPCs I put in that town. I barely used them, so there wasn't much developed in this town. That said, for the last three games he pretty much put the party out in the field and hasn't had them interact with the city or culture much, other than one ruler and a couple of mages.

Quote from: Cranewings;459175This is my greek / persian iron age E6/ Super Heroes Pathfinder setting I developed for the map Silver Lion did. When I was running, the party traveled up the Royal Road through Zathurm (Persia) as merchants to the Legus Atturim (Athenian League) city of Sikyon, on the boarder with Zathurm. The new guy has kept the game in Sikyon, using a few of the NPCs I put in that town. I barely used them, so there wasn't much developed in this town. That said, for the last three games he pretty much put the party out in the field and hasn't had them interact with the city or culture much, other than one ruler and a couple of mages.

Good to hear it is going well. Which map is this you mentioned?