On 2009-04-28, Moreno R. wrote:
I actively DESPISE being that kind of GM (the GM who judge other people's contribution to the game). I had to be a "traditional" GM for almost twenty years (because I was the only one who could do it in my old group), and at the end I was a bitter burn-out illusionist that improvised everything because I really didn't care anymore. My Sorcerer game failed because I really didn't like to call for humanity rolls. The games I most like GMing these days are DitV, Steal Away Jordan, One can have her, and for the rest, I play GM-less.
But I wasn't the GM in IAWA, and Contenders is GM-less.
With 3:16, I was the GM, so maybe I wasn't "traditional" enough with my GMing, but thinking about it, the narrations weren't "weak". Being more strict about these +1 wouldn't have helped in any way. Any player worth his salt can narrate a good reason for a +1. The problem is that is's ONLY and ALWAYS a +1. It's not a broken hand that you can build on.
(if the bonus would be variable, from +1 to +5, for example, as in the "old style" GM-ing Vincent talks about in these thread, I would have simply refused to be the GM)