Okay, maybe it isn't nostalgia, although it is for me. But do you and your players want the same things?
Sometimes I read about awesome games, or awesome settings, and I wonder . . . does this guy really have the players for that? Is it just you that wants to run a gritty-realism Dark Ages game? Is it just the GM who thinks humans-only and limited level advancement is cool?
Maybe a low-tech, human-only, gritty post-apocalypse game would be fun, but your players want Thundarr?
Or take it the other way. What if you want Thundarr, and your players insist on playing out a gritty zombie movie. "You find a sword hilt that bursts into a flaming sword!" "Okay, we scrap it to power our anti-zombie searchlights."
If you're playing with folks who grew up with Diablo, Planescape, and all those monsters-as-main-characters games of the 90s, will they prefer more of a "freak show" party more than you?
This is all ideally worked out pre-game, either with "you guys do whatever, and I'll adapt" or "here is your list of options." But sometimes you end up needing to work it out in game. I love complicated monetary systems, detailed treasure, fast-and-loose combat, and ruthlessly fatality-filled games. But I know my players don't care as much about the complication, like tight combat rules, and prefer a bit less assured PC death. So I have to modulate what I include - it's not just my nostalgia I'm catering too on Sundays.
When I was young we played pretty freak-showish because I used to have a centaur character. But we played the old Gygax modules and they seemed to have something more than other modules. Gygax seemed to impart some historical and mythological elements into his modules that other modules did not. He also imparted some cool stuff from fantasy literature as well. Other modules seemed to just be things like Queen of the Demon Web Pits type stuff. I don't know why but that kind of fantasy just seems too over the top to me. A demon queen in a giant spider ship? Did not make sense to me.
ReplyDeleteI quit playing RPGs for a long time until Vampire the Masquerade came along and I was lucky to have a great DM. What added to the feeling of being a vampire PC was the drawing from mythology and history. That made the game seem more real to me. I then bought GURPS historical books and really enjoyed them but the games were sort of limited. Ars Magica was really cool too but I wanted more action likee DF. So I tried to combine DF with historical GURPS books and Ars Magica books to create a pseudo historical DF game world.
So now I am interested in historical stuff, especially asian history. That was why I posted the video about Marco Polo, it seems like those adventures would be perfect for a DF party going from Europe to explore the East. Basically, my nostagia is for what I wish AD&D would have been.
The important thing is, if you and your players are both hoping for the same thing - it's all good. I just wonder about some settings and ideas and think, geez, is everyone on board with that?
DeleteI'll try to check out that documentary once I have reliable internet access again - Sandy took out power by me so my access is unreliable at the moment.
I generally use some variant on Bill Stoddard's campaign-selection voting system. There are games I'd like to run that the players don't go for - Traveller-style free trading, for example. Or the one I came up with which uses the old World of Darkness: you've just been vamped. The guy who did it thinks you should be grateful. Time to burn the whole thing down! Which would end up combining the classic adventure material with high-level political interference.
ReplyDeleteBill's voting system is a great idea. I do it a bit more informally, but I love his formal method.
DeleteIt does suck when you have this awesome game idea, but you're the only one who wants to play it and the only one who wants to run it. There are a few games I'd be way into, but I'm also cognizant of the fact that only I'd really be into it. I think it's more fun in the long run for me to play something I'm kind of into, but my players love, than the other way around.
Yes, I think I agree - as a GM I generally start with enough enthusiasm for about 2-3 sessions, but if the game's going to last longer than that I'm absolutely reliant on player buy-in.
DeleteI find that there are many things I cannot actually get to the game table with any seriousness. The phrase for much of it is... "someone else's nostalgia." I have a similar reaction when I read blogs about games that simply make no sense to me. "Ah... maybe it's just someone else's nostalgia."
ReplyDeleteNostalgia alone is not enough to motivate a long running campaign. It can inspire one, but it cannot sustain one indefinitely.
I like the phrase "someone else's nostalgia." That sums up a lot of what I feel reading about some games. And I agree on nostalgia alone - it can start a game, but the game itself must still be entertaining in and of itself.
DeleteThe great thing about the recent flowering of videoconference gaming on G+ is that it allows likeminded gamers to connect much more easily, as distance is less of a factor. In the same way that Ebay allows buyers and sellers to connect that might not otherwise. One can propose a rather specific game online and have a much higher chance of finding players that are interested, requiring less overall compromise. I am successfully running a very idiosyncratic weekly LBB-only OD&D game right now.
ReplyDeleteIt's not the same thing as in person gaming around the table, but it's pretty good.
I play in two weekly games. One uses videoconferencing on Google Plus with Tabletop Forge, the other leverages MapTools.
DeleteOf the two, I find the G+/Tabletop forge (Pathfinder) more compelling from a player experience point of view. The MapTools/text chat game is GURPS Dungeon Fantasy (playing Pathfinder Jade Regent usign DF), which I enjoy more from a system, immersion, and satisfaction of overall RPing experience point of view.
The MT interface tends to break frequently, though it seems much more, well, awesome. The Tabletop Forge works, though, giving enough options and visualization to get the point across.
We still haven't tried gaming online, which is too bad - there are days I could run game but can't really get out of the house, and player I'd happily run game for who can't make it either. I just haven't talked anyone into it.
DeleteAnd Kromm hasn't take me up on my offer to set up a laptop for him and Skype him into my games, so I can kill off the line editor's PCs. ;)