thread: 2011-02-21 : Into the Unknown?
On 2011-03-22, Vincent wrote:
Designing a way to GM
In every game I can think of, the GM-side game design is integrated into the player-side game design. In Apocalypse World, for instance, the GM-side game design isn't in the "how to MC" instructions - they're orientation, not mechanics - it's in the moves, starting right with the basic moves. Read them with attention to it and you'll see that THEY make it natural for the GM to look at NPCs through crosshairs, be a fan of the characters, respond with fuckery and intermittent rewards, etc.
The GM vs player split you're working with means that you're trying to design two games that work together without interacting, which is nuts. It might just be really hard, I don't know, but it might well be plain impossible.
Experiencing what it's like
No, I don't think that "play through a back and forth with the GM" is especially strong. My detective-monk is there in the hovel with the dude, dirt floor and animal smells, there's no GM to intermediate. I'm sitting at a table with some diet Dr. Pepper. When he wants to take the dude by the shoulders and shake sense into him, he does it, he doesn't lean forward at the table and say "I take him by the shoulders and shake him."
I think you'd be better off figuring out what it's like - taking a stand, yourself, on what it's really like to interrogate a recalcitrant father - and designing rules to give the players that experience instead.
Which brings me to:
Insights into human nature & experience
David, man, those are the most boring, obvious insights I've ever heard. I'm never going to love a game if the best it can offer me is "people trust who they know" and "body language is a thing."
You have lots and lots of insights into roleplaying as a practice. Seriously! I admire your work in that area, your little comics especially. To design a game, you need more.
Maybe something about ambitious people, at least? Or curiosity?
