From: lee@sq.sq.com (Liam R. E. Quin)
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
X-Feet: bare
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 03:14:20 GMT

wade@nb.rockwell.com (Wade Guthrie) writes:
> First, let me say that as a GM, I do not improvise -- I refrain from this
> not because I feel it is bad; I refrain from improvisation because I suck
> at it.

Which is fine and reasonable...

> That said, it is the GMs job to establish a world inside which the
> characters can operate.  It should seem as though the world is real and
> tangible, no matter how the GM arrives at it.  The characters (and players,
> for that matter) should be thinking to themselves "why did that guy do
> that?" rather than "why did the GM have that guy do that?" -- in the same
> way that in a good movie one wonders about the characters' motives rather
> than the screenwriters' motives for making the character do something.

I couldn't agree more strongly.  Well said!

> Given that frame of mind, the GM has another roll: that of entertainer. 

And I couldn't agree more with this, either.
> If the world is too hard or too easy the players will become bored -- the GM
> will be marked as a bad GM.  If the world is full of puzzles, but the
> players like hack-and-slash, it is up to the GM to modify the world a bit
> to help the players enjoy the game more.

A GM with a large pool of players can simply choose different players,
of course.  I am not sure that the GM has any responsibility towards
the player's enjoyment, although it is certainly a laudable and desireable
goal that the GM bear enjoyment at the forefront of his mind!

[...]

> sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:
>>> sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:
>>>> As far as I can tell, the main attack on improv is "The GM is too much
>>>> influenced by the players."  I have yet to see any proof of this.

wade@nb.rockwell.com (Wade Guthrie) writes:
> That depends on the GM.  It doesn't matter how the world is created; if the
> players are having fun, the GM is a good one (it IS a game, after all).

>> gt9405b@prism.gatech.EDU> (Lord Goodgulf the Ma-a-a-agical Wizard) writes:
[at least, I think this is Goodgulf, it might've been Frito]
>> 1. Improv GMs cannot create detailed maps, written portions and physical
>> props.

> Some GMs can improvise a map as well as [they] can prepare one.
> As long as the world SEEMS seamless, it's okay.

As soneone who has more than once improvised detailed maps, I can agree.
Of course, the characters (People) don't generally have access to maps, so
drawing a pretty map is only for the players' enjoyment in that case, or to
add to atmosphere, but is essentially artificial.  If the People _do_ have
access to a map, it's another story.

> Besides, even if a GM has every last
> thing planned out, (s)he HAS to be able to improvise.  For example:

> Character: "My character takes everyone's sword, pounds them through this
> here chest (after Fred the mage, here, casts a silence) and drops it down
> the stairs"

> GM: "Well, f*ck, I didn't think of that. . ."

:-) :-)

>> 2. Players dislike the feeling that the GM is altering the scenario to
>> make the party successful. The ``spoon feeding'' argument [...].

> This is always bad.  The players should feel that the GM is just telling a
> story -- one that is currently happening.  The GM is not making things
> happen; (s)he is just relaying what is happening all by itself.
[...]

Agreed.  One thing I have noticed here is the difference between the players
who say `I have just done this' and those who say `Ferdinand is going to. do
this'.  I am not sure this is relevant, though.  :-)

>> 3. Players dislike the feeling that they are bouncing around in a world
>> which is unplanned by the GM -- if the GM doesn't know what is going on,
>> who does?

> The GM does not have to know what is going on so long as he APPEARS that he
> knows what's going on.

AGREED!!!

>> 4. Improv GMing is vulnerable to the capriciousness of the GM -- GM has a
>> bad day, players have a bad day. With prep, the sceanrio is planned over
>> time, which has a leveling effect on the GM.

> Lets face it.  GMing is vulnerable to the capriciousness of the GM.

I think that the illusion of fairness conveyed by visible dice rolls and
obvious pre-planning is a strong one, but it is not at all impossible to
present such an illusion even if everything is improvised.  The trick is
to be consistent where it matters.

>> 5. Improv GMs are more likely to throw in an insignificant detail on the
>> fly with could come back to haunt them as a logical hole in the game
> world.

> That is the GMs problem.

And can be fun rather than a logical hole, if treated well.
It can even make an entire session look meticulously planned.

Thanks for a well-reasoned and well-presented article, Wayne!

Lee

-- 
Liam Quin, lee@sq.com, SoftQuad, Toronto, 416 239-4801; the barefoot programmer
  lq-text (Unix text retrieval package) mailing list: lq-text-request@sq.com
  latest released version: 1.10; ftp: ftp.cs.toronto.edu in directory: pub
  If Adultery is for Adults, is Juvenal for Juveniles?
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc