[bangbangtequila]

I have no experience as a GM, but I have years of playing under my belt in most game systems, and I only have one big piece of universal advice for every game: make sure everyone is invested in the story.

After the first session together, have everyone do a write up. Have them talk about backgrounds and get involved in the story and share a vision of the world you're playing in. Some people are born storytellers, some need a little help to express their idea of the world around them. Giving everyone a chance to explore the world they're playing in makes everyone feel involved, have a stake in the game beyond just playing - they're creating the game.

To each their own of course, I can just assure you that players who feel invested tend to play together more, and have more fun in the sessions.

[TwoDSix]

The big problem with a 'GM advice book' is that people will GM in very different ways. In essence most GMing advice I've seen actually boils down to:

• Prepare, but not too much. So for each problem make sure there are at least 3 solutions, but don't limit yourself to a railed plot.
• Improvise. This is where I see the most problems, with GMs either sticking to rails so that they don't have anything unplanned come up, or freezing when an unplanned event occurs.
• If you don't use something you planned, don't throw it away, but slot it in there yourself.

Now my GMing style (I arrive at games with a folder of NPCs and a basic outline, and then try to go from there) might be different to my friend's (have a campaign plan, think on your feet when the PCs go off the outline to get the plot proceeding okay) and my other friend's style (rewrite the plot after every session to accommodate new developments), but the key is that we are all willing to put in some effort and think on our feet in varying amounts. What that means is that any GM guide has to have some suggestions on what not to plan, because in my experience overplanning leads to GM burnout.

[Reaver]

The big problem with a 'GM advice book' is that people will GM in very different ways. In essence most GMing advice I've seen actually boils down to:

• Prepare, but not too much. So for each problem make sure there are at least 3 solutions, but don't limit yourself to a railed plot.
• Improvise. This is where I see the most problems, with GMs either sticking to rails so that they don't have anything unplanned come up, or freezing when an unplanned event occurs.
• If you don't use something you planned, don't throw it away, but slot it in there yourself.

Now my GMing style (I arrive at games with a folder of NPCs and a basic outline, and then try to go from there) might be different to my friend's (have a campaign plan, think on your feet when the PCs go off the outline to get the plot proceeding okay) and my other friend's style (rewrite the plot after every session to accommodate new developments), but the key is that we are all willing to put in some effort and think on our feet in varying amounts. What that means is that any GM guide has to have some suggestions on what not to plan, because in my experience overplanning leads to GM burnout.

Lol.

"If you present a player with 3 choices, he'll pick the 9th option."

No plan survives first contact with the players. Simple as that. No matter how smart you think you are, or how many plans you have, your players will always choose the unexpected option. Always.

So yea, have an idea, have some notes, and then be prepared to wing it from there! If your lucky or good, you will be able to poke and prod your players in the direction you want them to go without using a shoe horn.

My general strategy is to have 3 (three) completely seperate runs planned and available at any given time. That way, if the players throw me a curve, and are not interested in a certain job, I have 2 others I can offer up on the spot. (And the rejected run goes back into the stack for a later date.)


TBH, I have about 8 generic runs all mapped out that I can pull out to use at anytime. And often do when working on the overall campaign plot. This allows me to both provide something every week, and allows me time to work out details and hooks towards the overall campaign, while offering the players a chance to 'do something' while I am working on the main plot. (Think Side Quests in any Crpg product...)

[TwoDSix]

The big problem with a 'GM advice book' is that people will GM in very different ways. In essence most GMing advice I've seen actually boils down to:

• Prepare, but not too much. So for each problem make sure there are at least 3 solutions, but don't limit yourself to a railed plot.
• Improvise. This is where I see the most problems, with GMs either sticking to rails so that they don't have anything unplanned come up, or freezing when an unplanned event occurs.
• If you don't use something you planned, don't throw it away, but slot it in there yourself.

Now my GMing style (I arrive at games with a folder of NPCs and a basic outline, and then try to go from there) might be different to my friend's (have a campaign plan, think on your feet when the PCs go off the outline to get the plot proceeding okay) and my other friend's style (rewrite the plot after every session to accommodate new developments), but the key is that we are all willing to put in some effort and think on our feet in varying amounts. What that means is that any GM guide has to have some suggestions on what not to plan, because in my experience overplanning leads to GM burnout.

Lol.

"If you present a player with 3 choices, he'll pick the 9th option."

No plan survives first contact with the players. Simple as that. No matter how smart you think you are, or how many plans you have, your players will always choose the unexpected option. Always.

Sorry, to explain where 'prepare 3 solutions' comes from:
If you prepare one solution, you will see that as the right way to solve it.
If you prepare two solutions you'll want one of them to be used.
If you can think of three solutions you are more likely to be open to player ideas.

The entire point is 'the more solutions you plan the more likely you are to accept the player's inventive solution'. 3 is just a number that's consistently plausible.

[Jack_Spade]

Reminds me of how to do investigative adventures right:

If there is one central clue to find, create at least three objects that can deliver that clue. And for every object create at least three ways the PCs can find them.

After that be prepared to have an NPC ready, to bash the PCs over the head with the clue (Someone breaking in to steal said clue usually works)

[Grizzly]

I anyone is half-way serious about this (an idea which I love) one way to provide some good crunch with minimal cost would be to take some of the scenarios from existing Mission's play (one scene, not the whole shebang) and have a 'crew' run through it showing the dice rolls, etc and applying all the rules correctly.

Another easy-to-implement but valuable section would be to have a listing of the current big metaplots, perhaps broken down by region/city, and their respective status.  This would make it easier for GM's to incorporate cannon material into their games (if desired) or at least help inspire home-brew ideas.

Frankly, especially as a GM's guide, you could even ditch a lot of the filler art you normally have to commission (further saving on costs). Those who buy it will be doing so for the rules explanations, creation guidelines, etc. While I always love the art I can live without it for a good crunchy PDF.

[Sipowitz]

The big problem with a 'GM advice book' is that people will GM in very different ways. In essence most GMing advice I've seen actually boils down to:

• Prepare, but not too much. So for each problem make sure there are at least 3 solutions, but don't limit yourself to a railed plot.
• Improvise. This is where I see the most problems, with GMs either sticking to rails so that they don't have anything unplanned come up, or freezing when an unplanned event occurs.
• If you don't use something you planned, don't throw it away, but slot it in there yourself.

Now my GMing style (I arrive at games with a folder of NPCs and a basic outline, and then try to go from there) might be different to my friend's (have a campaign plan, think on your feet when the PCs go off the outline to get the plot proceeding okay) and my other friend's style (rewrite the plot after every session to accommodate new developments), but the key is that we are all willing to put in some effort and think on our feet in varying amounts. What that means is that any GM guide has to have some suggestions on what not to plan, because in my experience overplanning leads to GM burnout.

Lol.

"If you present a player with 3 choices, he'll pick the 9th option."

No plan survives first contact with the players. Simple as that. No matter how smart you think you are, or how many plans you have, your players will always choose the unexpected option. Always.

So yea, have an idea, have some notes, and then be prepared to wing it from there! If your lucky or good, you will be able to poke and prod your players in the direction you want them to go without using a shoe horn.

My general strategy is to have 3 (three) completely seperate runs planned and available at any given time. That way, if the players throw me a curve, and are not interested in a certain job, I have 2 others I can offer up on the spot. (And the rejected run goes back into the stack for a later date.)


TBH, I have about 8 generic runs all mapped out that I can pull out to use at anytime. And often do when working on the overall campaign plot. This allows me to both provide something every week, and allows me time to work out details and hooks towards the overall campaign, while offering the players a chance to 'do something' while I am working on the main plot. (Think Side Quests in any Crpg product...)

I disagree.

From my experience gamers(both Gm and Players) are not nearly as smart or unpredictable as they think they are.

Players are predictable, very predictable.

I used to think it 'only if I haven't played with them before would I be surprised', but now that isn't even the case. 

YMMV

[Marzhin]

Yeah even if the players think they've picked a 9th option, I believe a GM worth his salt will always manage to subtly lead them back into one of his planned three paths.

[Reaver]

The idea is always to get them down whatever choices you've laid out.... The lies in doing it without a shoe horn.... Which is a technique I've seen used too many times sadly.

Another goid skill to develop is knowing when your players are not 'into' whatever little adventure you have planned. If your players are not interested, they are more likely to 'create' their own fun.... learning when to pull the plug on what you had planned, and starting new (or at least getting something fresh) is a skill good GMs also have....

[TwoDSix]

The idea is always to get them down whatever choices you've laid out.... The lies in doing it without a shoe horn.... Which is a technique I've seen used too many times sadly.

Another goid skill to develop is knowing when your players are not 'into' whatever little adventure you have planned. If your players are not interested, they are more likely to 'create' their own fun.... learning when to pull the plug on what you had planned, and starting new (or at least getting something fresh) is a skill good GMs also have....

My favourite is when I had a GM essentially tell us 'stop exploring the interesting abandoned extradimenional city and go explore the boring tower in the center in order to stop the bad guy'. The GM then complained that he had to trim his cutscene down to fit in (seriously? Why are you using the shoe horn).

I mean yes, we could have done that, but that adventure was really obviously railroaded and our PCs had no clue that there wasn't a portal out in the city itself, the idea was we'd spend a few hours exploring it to find interesting stuff before going to the tower.

In my experience, the trick is learning when to use 'quantum opposition' and when to just let it go. If the PCs must find out that CEO Exploitsalot is planning to blow up the city, make sure they stumble across the situation somehow. But if it's just meeting Awesome McBadass so he can give them a bit of dirt on their target, let them ignore the scene and go about it in their own way.

This is why I recommend GMs learn to improvise. I've had far more problems with players not taking the initiative and expecting me to give them a solution than with players who think outside the box, because the second I can roll with and work out a way for 'get a canister of doomgas in the CEO's office*' to be fun, whereas I can't do anything if I present a problem and the PCs come up with nothing.

* For example, how are they going to get the doomgas, and how will they trigger it so they get the CEO instead of the janitor (or the other way round).

[Raiderjoseph]

There are said books out there in some systems.

DnD used to publish the GM rulebook. It was filled ideas and suggestions on how to GM, deal with unexpected rules questions, dealing with different player personalities... the shebang....


And it was consistantly the worst selling book. For whatever reason, people just do not buy books that tell them either how to roleplay, or how to GM.

Which is a shame, as these 'GM books' have some great info and ideas in them regardless of the systems they where written for.


I think the problem comes down to 'Vision'. We all (player or GM) envision the worlds we play in differently. We may all read the same books and the same words, but based on our life experiences, education, and imagination,  all picture something different with our mind's eye...

And this can be a problem if 2 people's vision is wildly different, and is probably where a lot of issues come from.

I've found that if I spend a little time with my players/GMs and ask pointed questions, I can generally suss out if they are a good match for my playstyle or not. (Which has cut down on my wasted time and nonenjoyment of games)

Jokes on them in 5e. They missed out on an entire race and subrace if they didn't get the DM Guide. That and like the rules for most of the freaking universe. Seriously. One man cannot create an entire universe single handed. You need a reference. Which is why I love my old DM used the sourcebooks as much as possible.

[MijRai]

Uh, yes you can.  You can easily make a more 'accurate' setting than D&D while you're at it, too.  Well, sensical is a better term.  One where diseases aren't just mummy rot and filth fever and the population actually makes sense. 

I wouldn't even call Aasimar that worth it. 

[north]

For running shadowrun I've found its works better if at the end of a run you have the met for the next one.  In game it a week or 2 later but for the players it's before everybody goes home.  That way your players can talk and figure out a good plan, do leg work with their contacts over email, all the while it means you game day isn't taken over with well what about this or that.  It gives you time to make good calls and means you may get throu a run instead of just getting started.

[Lorebane24]

I think that the best way to improvise is to prepare far in advance.

It might not make sense at first, but in the game I am running, the PCs are working for a dude operating under both the names "Thermidor" and "Raphael" who is working for Damon (they don't know this last part) to essentially start a mob war that will weaken the syndicates in Boston enough that Damon can swoop in and take total control of Boston's underworld.  They heard Damon's name dropped and were looking into him for totally different reasons (they bought into the corporate line, at first, that Damon was the dragon who had attacked NeoNet Towers and crashed into Fenway).  They decide to go check out one of his clubs.  I had not been expecting this, and it has nothing to do with tonight's run.  However, I have enough moving pieces to the larger plot that I decide I can drop some teasers.

I have my party role edge to see how much they can find out here, and they get one hit with a glitch.  Alright, so they learn something, but the manner in which they learn it is not enough for them.  So far, they've only done a single job for Raphael (which sparked tensions between the two mafia families), have no idea he's connected to Damon, and don't know what the big plan is.  They don't know this either, but I decide that he's meeting with the Vory right now to try to con them into getting involved in this mob war.  They aren't there five minutes before a bouncer places his hand on the decker's shoulder and tells him "Raphael doesn't know how you found out about his meeting, but he says you need to leave.  Now."  Just before they're ejected from the club, the party makes good on a perception check and sees a couple of dudes with weird tattoos guarding the door to a back room.  Definitely not club security.  They run the tattoos through a matrix search later and learn they are the mark of a thief-in-law (Vory grunts)

So with roleplay and research, this detour ate up almost half an extra hour of game time, but because I've plotted out what's happening behind the scenes, I've been able to show that party that Raphael is meeting in Damon's clubs, that he's talking to the Vory, and now he also doesn't much care for them because he assumes they're trying to snoop on him.  They actually may end up fighting him later, because the decker HATES him.  Then they get to learn the hard way he used to be a Seraphim! 

[freddieflatline]

One of the best GM guide books that I have ever used for the Cyberpunk genre is Listen Up, You Primitive Screwheads!!!!: The Unexpurgated Cyberpunk Referee's Guide. I know that it is for Cyberpunk 2020 but it still gives a good feel for any Dystopian setting.  Also I have to agree with some of the other folks on this thread Mr. Johnson's Little Black Book is awesome and if you want to see how to run Corpsec. try Corporate Security Handbook.