Playing a GMless game

[Vladim]

6 hours ago, shawnhcorey said:

I'm interested but I'm not interested in buying more RPG stuff until I have read what I already have. And that's going to take a while.

Ironsworn is actually 100% free (legally) and 100% awesome, so... not much needed to invest except a bit of time. And there's lots of good actual plays out there that help pick up the rules organically/in the context of play.

[shawnhcorey]

22 minutes ago, Vladim said:

Ironsworn is actually 100% free (legally) and 100% awesome, so... not much needed to invest except a bit of time. And there's lots of good actual plays out there that help pick up the rules organically/in the context of play.

Yes, I have just downloaded a copy. Now to find time to read it.

[RedMax]

I think a GM-less game could work. But, I think it would drift into the same problems as a group writing game. Like, all those Star Trek "games" online that are actually just group story writing. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 😉 

The people who play these group writing simulations are quite happy with the experience, but some people who play a lot of role-playing games (like me) find it hard to enjoy the group writing stuff because there is no GM, no arbiter, no judge overseeing the story to make sure it stays challenging and interesting and balanced.

In my experience, GM-less game systems generally fall prey to the same pitfalls as the Star Trek sims. 

And to reiterate, I have no problem with the Star Trek sims. It's just that, for me, they don't have that GM aspect that I need to enjoy an rpg-type experience.

The solution: I think a rotating GM-ship is the best substitute. 

The way it works: a person advertises the game. It is, for example, AD&D 1e. The person suggests some modules, perhaps a free online module that is a PDF posted at Dragonsfoot. The players assemble and make their characters in a forum. Then you randomly choose a player to start the game. You make a list of all the players and go through the list in order over and over, and each GM takes over for exactly 10 posts (for example). The next person on the list knows they are taking over, they take the baton for the next 10 posts. Everyone has access to the PDF and so they can pick up where the last person left off.

If you get a player who drops out, the protocol is that if two days pass then the next GM on the list picks up the baton.

I've never tried this method but I think something like this could work.

 

[Jedaii]

I look at the GM-less games like this one as everyone involved acting as both GMs and Players. It works especially well when those with GM experience are involved.

[yxanthymir]

4 hours ago, RedMax said:

I think a GM-less game could work. But, I think it would drift into the same problems as a group writing game. Like, all those Star Trek "games" online that are actually just group story writing. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 😉 

The people who play these group writing simulations are quite happy with the experience, but some people who play a lot of role-playing games (like me) find it hard to enjoy the group writing stuff because there is no GM, no arbiter, no judge overseeing the story to make sure it stays challenging and interesting and balanced.

In my experience, GM-less game systems generally fall prey to the same pitfalls as the Star Trek sims. 

And to reiterate, I have no problem with the Star Trek sims. It's just that, for me, they don't have that GM aspect that I need to enjoy an rpg-type experience.

The solution: I think a rotating GM-ship is the best substitute. 

The way it works: a person advertises the game. It is, for example, AD&D 1e. The person suggests some modules, perhaps a free online module that is a PDF posted at Dragonsfoot. The players assemble and make their characters in a forum. Then you randomly choose a player to start the game. You make a list of all the players and go through the list in order over and over, and each GM takes over for exactly 10 posts (for example). The next person on the list knows they are taking over, they take the baton for the next 10 posts. Everyone has access to the PDF and so they can pick up where the last person left off.

If you get a player who drops out, the protocol is that if two days pass then the next GM on the list picks up the baton.

I've never tried this method but I think something like this could work.

 

Microscope is more a collaborative story than a real game, but Microscope is really great to create a collaborative setting, and then play a more light rules RPG in that setting.

Rotating that frequent with a constructed game I don't see it working, since everyone will know the dangers and the secrets, but from a story (or a scene in a sand box game) to another, that definitively can work.

Edited May 19, 2023 by yxanthymir (see edit history)

[hakootoko]

I'd be interested in trying something like this, but I think at least something about it has to be decided before players commit to it.

 

I've seen people try to advertise Fate games with nothing decided, and then trying to get the group to decide on the setting and rules after players are selected. I've never seen one survive that phase and reach character creation.

Edited May 19, 2023 by hakootoko (see edit history)

[RedMax]

27 minutes ago, yxanthymir said:

Microscope is more a collaborative story than a real game, but Microscope is really great to create a collaborative setting, and then play a more light rules RPG in that setting.

Rotating that frequent with a constructed I don't see it working, since everyone will know the dangers and the secrets, but from a story (or even a scene)  to another or in a sand box game, that definitively can work.

 

I hear what you're saying, but this is my take: at some point, the characters always learn the secret of a scenario. If you're a player in a regular game, the DM or GM gradually gives you all the information and then you ultimately have all the info, even if sometimes the character only has all the pieces of the puzzle post-humously 😉

In the rotating GM-ship, let's imagine that it's a D&D game, and one player is the DM and she reads that the chest in the room is actually boobytrapped. Okay, so my recommendation would be that her character acts lasts, and as far as possible the player shouldn't use the information to her advantage. So the "GM" player rolls the trap roll, and the damage if the roll fails etc.

One character has to kind of fade into the background while that character's player is GM. If the gaming group all know you are headed into a thief-type situation (Find/Remove Traps) then that player should skip their turn as GM. The thief player could make up their lost GM turn GMing combat later.

 

PS: I'd be willing to test this method out--we could try the rotating GM-ship with an available PDF module and see how it goes? Any takers on this thread? 🙂

Edited May 19, 2023 by RedMax (see edit history)

[Vladim]

I've done the rotating GM thing (but changing every adventure, not scene) and it works... again, the key is finding people with whom you have good chemistry and preferences and expectations, which is not always as easy as it sounds, especially with internet strangers.

To calibrate, I recommend running first a published module and adding twists and turns to it, so that everyone can agree on the tone and mood and playstyle as the game is played.

For mysteries, and for retaining the possibility of being surprised, I think what works best is for everyone to come to the table without any idea of the mystery and the secrets, or a very rough outline at most. Then, the group can create the mystery as it unfolds by combining story elements and prompts. This way, everyone can be surprised. The human brain is good at pulling clues and prompts and threads together to make a coherent story.

[Malkavian Grin]

6 hours ago, RedMax said:

rotating GM-ship [every 10 posts]

Where I see issue with this is that every player now knows the full secrets of the module (if using that method). There are plenty of modules out there with details given about things well in advance, in order to setup the proper weight of the end reveal. A 3.5e module I've run multiple times has such a reveal; you turn around once you know the end detail and go "Oooohhh the whole thing suddenly makes a lot of sense now!"

Personally, it's less satisfying for me as a player to have all of that "spoiled" but your mileage may vary.

The reason I play solo games is the very mystery behind every action. I don't know what I'll find at the end of the creepy stairs, or in the forest glen, or in the tavern. Maybe it's nothing. Maybe it's a safe haven or an ambush. Maybe it's some kind of milestone on "the quest." I honestly find the way Ironsworn handles these things very, very elegant and inspiring.

If you go with rotating GMs I would suggest doing it every adventure (and not using your PC during it; find a way to send them on some personal quest...... but then this isn't really solo gaming anymore....).

1 hour ago, hakootoko said:

I think at least something about it has to be decided before players commit to it.

Fully agree.

A theme, tone, and at least a system should all be agreed on beforehand. Is it Hyperborea 3e focusing on the more fantastic part of the setting? Is it epic fantasy where you are literally saving the world? Is it sci-fi Traveler 20 or Firefly?

Once you know that, you can start with a small questionnaire about world/setting Truths.

[MinjaMan]

Also check out this pdf as it has great rules for playing gmless.

Archipelago ruleset

 

Those roll tables on Ironsworn and in other places can help add twists and good prompts to the story where everyone can be surprised. 

 

I'm thinking it would work very similar to fiasco. Players take turns setting up the scene for their character.

[Vladim]

Yes.

Another system you could use to maintain surprise is to also have an element of randomness to character decisions. Perhaps give PCs some personality traits (or even use a dedicated system of traits like Pendragon has) and then roll at critical junctures. That way, players are also learning their characters as the story unfolds... which can actually be quite fun and surprising.

[DarkisNotEvil]

4 hours ago, Vladim said:

Yes.

Another system you could use to maintain surprise is to also have an element of randomness to character decisions. Perhaps give PCs some personality traits (or even use a dedicated system of traits like Pendragon has) and then roll at critical junctures. That way, players are also learning their characters as the story unfolds... which can actually be quite fun and surprising.

Pendragon is one of the best systems for this specifically because there are a good number of tables for GM-less adventure threads, such as the Rumors table, At the Crossroads, or the Book of Feasts. As for me, though, I've never been able to totally commit to a solo RPG, mostly because it tends to get pretty stale. Maybe it's just the kind of person I am, but I've always viewed games without at least one other individual as like having a cheat engine open at all times- no accountability. While it can be oodles of fun to break loose and indulge to the maximum extent, at that point you're toying with the system in of itself, and it's closer to reading or writing a novel.

[Rune Knight]

I'm gonna have to disagree with RedMax there: I certainly don't want to do a rotating GMs thing. The best way that I see this working is if we use a few good random tables, let the story flow freely, and negotiate together about what might happen at any point where improvisation fails us.

I do agree with Malkavian, though: I motion that we establish here what system, genre, and premise we'll use.

My vote for system would be Fate (Core), secondarily Ironsworn or another RPG like it.

I'm comfortable with fantasy, contemporary, and sci-fi settings in general, though I'm pretty engrossed in lots of sci-fi and fantasy right now, so a contemporary setting or something else would be preferable to me. I'm not saying I won't do fantasy or sci-fi, it just wouldn't be my first choice.

Once we nail down genre, I'll be able to suggest a few relevant campaign premises from my notes.

[Vladim]

42 minutes ago, DarkisNotEvil said:

Pendragon is one of the best systems for this specifically because there are a good number of tables for GM-less adventure threads, such as the Rumors table, At the Crossroads, or the Book of Feasts. As for me, though, I've never been able to totally commit to a solo RPG, mostly because it tends to get pretty stale. Maybe it's just the kind of person I am, but I've always viewed games without at least one other individual as like having a cheat engine open at all times- no accountability. While it can be oodles of fun to break loose and indulge to the maximum extent, at that point you're toying with the system in of itself, and it's closer to reading or writing a novel.

It definitely can be more writing than gaming sometimes. I personally don't mind that at all, as I (sometimes) get my kicks out of writing, but it's very much a ymmv situation.

As for accountability... It never really bothers me, to be honest. The concept of "fairness" is anyway moot in an rpg (imo) so it's all about the kind of story you want to have. You can do both indulgent power fantasy where you basically just kick butt and are awesome all the time, or a highly lethal survival scenario where death is a very real possibility, or anything in between. The rules and the dice provide the framework, and then it's up to you to reinforce or change the tone by determining the narrative details and interpreting rolls.

But I agree that it can get stale at times, plus the need or desire to be creative all the time is a bit of a burden. Co-op gives you other people to bounce ideas off of, but that comes with its own pros and cons.

[hakootoko]

7 hours ago, Rune Knight said:

My vote for system would be Fate (Core), secondarily Ironsworn or another RPG like it.

I'm comfortable with fantasy, contemporary, and sci-fi settings in general, though I'm pretty engrossed in lots of sci-fi and fantasy right now, so a contemporary setting or something else would be preferable to me. I'm not saying I won't do fantasy or sci-fi, it just wouldn't be my first choice.

Once we nail down genre, I'll be able to suggest a few relevant campaign premises from my notes.

 

I know Fate Core and wouldn't mind reading through Ironsworn.

How about 'historical' as a genre? It requires less worldbuilding and means we all have (somewhat) similar expectations from the setting.