Brian Rogers (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
subplotkudzu) wrote2008-02-02 12:25 pm
subplotkudzu) wrote2008-02-02 12:25 pm
Entry tags:
Design Differences
One week after my first Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw game I feel like I've finished my pre-game prep for it, hashing out the last of the things I wanted to have on paper and ended up winging a the game was progressing. The first years now have their schedules, I have notes on the things I covered in the last hour of play and the players have a description of the their dorm rooms, the school clubs and other world-building notes, another 4 pages added to the 10 page rules packet. In trying to be true to Rowling's setting and trying to keep the game set up for two year-long mysteries of 3 sessions a piece I have to do an enormous amount of work. It's fun, but it's time consuming. I can only do it because none of the new parents ended up in this game and I have 5 reliable players .
One day before the second House of the Dragon game I have my pre-game prep done. It's a session title, one paragraph of session goals and the remainder of the sheet with game stats for the villains. That's it. I have, in my head, a whole bunch of cool stunts, visuals and tactics I intend to try out, but have no need to note them in advance.
The differences in design are really staggering. House of the Dragon has very little mystery, on the fly characterizations and GM directed plots - meet the bad guys, fight the bad guys, track the bad guys, defeat the bad guys, hope none of the PCs die and they all get to do cool stuff. Hufflepuff & Ravenclaw started on rails, is totally open to the PCs in the next session and a half and will end in one of a few likely ways based on how well they suss out the major mystery. That sort of balancing between genre demands and player freedom of movement requires a lot more investment, and the character's are deeper and require more time and effort to bring into focus.
As has been discussed before, it would be nice if someone was actually able to teach classes on GMing, because there are so many equally valid ways to do it that, in many cases, are at odds with one another.
One day before the second House of the Dragon game I have my pre-game prep done. It's a session title, one paragraph of session goals and the remainder of the sheet with game stats for the villains. That's it. I have, in my head, a whole bunch of cool stunts, visuals and tactics I intend to try out, but have no need to note them in advance.
The differences in design are really staggering. House of the Dragon has very little mystery, on the fly characterizations and GM directed plots - meet the bad guys, fight the bad guys, track the bad guys, defeat the bad guys, hope none of the PCs die and they all get to do cool stuff. Hufflepuff & Ravenclaw started on rails, is totally open to the PCs in the next session and a half and will end in one of a few likely ways based on how well they suss out the major mystery. That sort of balancing between genre demands and player freedom of movement requires a lot more investment, and the character's are deeper and require more time and effort to bring into focus.
As has been discussed before, it would be nice if someone was actually able to teach classes on GMing, because there are so many equally valid ways to do it that, in many cases, are at odds with one another.
no subject
Very good point on how different games run by the same GM, even, "require" different amounts of prep. (I put the quotes in because GMs break the rules all the time.)