I have a pondering for you guys in regards to game tempo and quality over quantity.

Understanding that each playing group is different, there is a general consensus that combat should be fast, prep time should be minimal and GM's need to be adaptable; able to cater to a parties erratic decisions and random directions chosen.

Are we endanger of diluting our craft with this model?

I mean by this are we sacrificing story telling and drama for speed and adaptability?

Could we possibly burn out GM's forced to constantly draw from the well of inspiration on the fly, or force them to comprise their story telling methods to facilitate the whim of the players.

There is something to be said about the value of +Sean P Kelley​​​​​ 's train methods ;)

Focusing the game allows the Gm to provide a better narrative, a more cohesive story and greater "bang for the buck" as it were.

Now please don't think I'm talking about railroading the players into my story (not even Sean does that I'm sure), but what I think there should be more focus on is keeping the individual sessions to script.

Sure the players throw curve balls during the session, but essentially what the Gm has planned should be achieved.

I'm not advocating players jump from hoop A to B to C, but that the GM's flexibility (and skill) allows the players to start at A, visit any letter in the alphabet during the session (within a defined sandbox), but ultimately end up at C by the end of the session.

A Gm should be encouraged to guide (not railroad) players to the planned finality of the session, otherwise story's and campaigns can lose continuity and meaning.

I spend a great deal of my sessions as GM like a reverse fisherman. I already have the fish, I am actually seeking the hooks that will keep them on the line.

The playes actions, wants and needs come out in the current session. I then tailor the next session to this...not the one we are currently in, beyond their random wandering around the set sandbox of the session.

The session thereby becomes better told. Better fleshed out, combat and scenarios are better staged and the players still get to stamp their mark / personality into the game.

I feel too much player agency leaves the Gm "heading cats", combat and encounters become to generic and GMing becomes a chore instead of a hobby.

Am I a heretic in today's gaming world?
Shared publiclyView activity