Quote from: Dr Rotwang!Dear Bill:

One day, I was driving my 2-year-old daughter home from Grandma's, listening to a CD which, as it happened, included "Everybody Have Fun Tonight".  

We got home and I got out of the truck, came 'round the side and opened up her door.  As I reached in to undo the straps on her carseat, I heard my daughter sing, clearly:

"Ev-y body have fun to-night!"

I beamed, and almost wept; not only is that my gaming motto (and, in fact, one of my guiding prnciples in life), but my kid liked the song, too.

Respect?  Veneration is closer to the mark.

Sincerely,

-- R!

And just so we are clear...I have all of their albums from Live at Montreal to Points on a Curve...mmm, Points on a Curve, now that is an album.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltThe question here is do you, as GM or player, expect the group's mood/wants to determine play? With the threads on saying yes to players and the evils there of, it seemed like the message was "My way or the highway". Of course, I could be misunderstanding those posts.

I think the misunderstanding there is the one so common on the internet, "the fallacy of the excluded middle." It's not either the GM always says "yes", or the players are dancing monkeys there for the GM's amusement. There's a whole range of playstyles in between those two extremes, and combination of different approaches.

As well as railroady GMs, and group therapy mediator types, there can be..

A GM who offers a written-out railroady module and campaign for play - seems like it'll be rigid and inflexible, but in play the GM responds to what the players come up with, and perhaps even leaves the module behind. Begin with decision, go on with consensus.

Or you could have a GM who asks everyone what they want, mashes it together into a campaign they think will suit, but once it's begun, GMs strictly according to the rules of the setting and system, regardless of player desires.

Or you could have another GM who listens to their three current players, but ignores the new player, "you have to be in the group at least six months before we listen to you." Or a GM who ignores the current players and listens to the new one, because they expect the current players to stay no matter what, but the newbie has to be pampered or they might leave.

At any one time there'll be "executive decision" and "consultation". The extremes are quite rare.

Aside from that, the ideal GMing approach to decision and consultation, well of course Rotwang has it as always.

I find that the players rarely all have the same mood, myself.  But then, my group has 8 regulars so that's bound to happen.

I treat it a bit like an ensemble TV show.

Not everyone gets spotlight time every session (mine are only 3 hours at a time).  But everyone gets some spotlight time every few sessions.  So, if you want your character to accomplish X, it might not get around to it tonight, but maybe next session or the one after that.

I also try to mix it up a bit.  A combat-heavy session one week will invariably relax to a more interaction or investigation-focused session the next week.  Plot-themed type stuff shows up every so often whenever the characters get done with one thing, just to spur the action in a new direction.

Finally, I use discretionary encounters based on the majority mood of the group.  If the game is running long and people are gettting tired, I might gloss over a combat or remove the encounter entirely.  If the players have been investigating all night and seem ancy, I throw in a random encounter to let them get some excitement in.

Quote from: HinterWeltAnd just so we are clear...I have all of their albums from Live at Montreal to Points on a Curve...mmm, Points on a Curve, now that is an album.

Bill

Where do you live?

And when are you gone?

Huh?  No, man, just...uh...chatting.  You know.  Look, a monkey driving a bus full of clowns!

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!Where do you live?

And when are you gone?

Huh?  No, man, just...uh...chatting.  You know.  Look, a monkey driving a bus full of clowns!

Now, if you like Wang Chung (which you obviously do) making you a man of discerning taste, what are your thoughts on Men Without Hats? Good I would expect.

And I live in Frankfort IL now...and looking for a group of playas! Probably a bit too much of a commute though...We did meet at gen con though, oh one of the distinguished tie!

Bill

Quote from: jgantsI find that the players rarely all have the same mood, myself.  But then, my group has 8 regulars so that's bound to happen.

I treat it a bit like an ensemble TV show.

Not everyone gets spotlight time every session (mine are only 3 hours at a time).  But everyone gets some spotlight time every few sessions.  So, if you want your character to accomplish X, it might not get around to it tonight, but maybe next session or the one after that.

I also try to mix it up a bit.  A combat-heavy session one week will invariably relax to a more interaction or investigation-focused session the next week.  Plot-themed type stuff shows up every so often whenever the characters get done with one thing, just to spur the action in a new direction.

Finally, I use discretionary encounters based on the majority mood of the group.  If the game is running long and people are gettting tired, I might gloss over a combat or remove the encounter entirely.  If the players have been investigating all night and seem ancy, I throw in a random encounter to let them get some excitement in.

I have used this approach before as well but it can be really rough on the non-focused on players if they do not enjoy the story. Although, it has worked more often than not, it is also a bit fatiguing as the GM. What I mean is that I am constantly going, keeping up with the player(s) then the focus shifts and suddenly I am dealing with a fresh player or group. This is not to say it is a bad approach but I have often found it difficult for me to maintain of an extended campaign. That is more about me than the method though.

Bill