Hi everybody,
I have seen quiet some discussions about playing without GM / MC popping up in the last few days.
I have been working on a GM-less System that should work with any PbtA game.
This is in an early stage and has not yet been playtested properly but I thought I might want to share it already to get some comments.
Feedback is much appreciated.
Interesting thoughts. I currently lack the processing power to give you constructive feedback, but I’ll try to come back to your document when my brain starts working again.
I have been trying to workout as well how to do a GM-less system.
I am split between:
1. Everyone creates and runs their own threats. You become the MC when the threat is yours.
2. Who ever is not in the scene becomes the MC for in the current scene.
My only issue is how to run actions when everyone is together. It works if everyone is on the gun jumping in as NPC’s or as the MC to resolve issues for others.
Thanks for sharing! Will definitely look into this, because getting a group around the table ain’t as easy as it was way back in college…
Eric Nieudan sure take your time.
Tommy Rayburn thanks for sharing your thoughts. In the first step I have tried to create mechanics for GM that would not simply be solved by storytelling.
I have not given special scenarios like split up of the group a thought yet.
Indeed when the whole group is together I expect one character to step back a little, so the player can MC besides.
Henry de Veuve great, share your thoughts once you’ve read it
The first step for multi GMing would be to write new agendas and principles for them right?
Why couldn’t a multi-Gm use the same agendas and principles?
Because you would need to address how you should deal with your own character and their wants/needs.
Tim Franzke thank you for the comment. Indeed I did not consider that. The agendas & principles as described in the AW book are for me somewhat self-evident, as I am GMing for more than a decade already.
Indeed I should try to generalize them a bit for the MGS and put it in written, in a way it could be used by rookies.
I’ll work on that and have it in the v.3
Tim Franzke, if it is a close nit group …. others jump in to deal with your character. I have played this way and it works with practice. But this probably only works in a group with members everyone trusts.
Tommy Rayburn, I fully recognize your statement and this is the reason why I haven’t included it yet. But if I want to write a system for beginners & experienced players alike, I should include it
No, I agree. I just think it should be menetioned that step can easier if the trust and experience is there.
Alright guys, I have given the Agendas & Principles a take.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Byfigp9SbHYdVmlRWHZlNVEzbzA/edit?usp=sharing
Feedback as always is much appreciated. Especially Tim Franzke & Tommy Rayburn , as you were involved in that discussion shortly you might want to have a look.
My biggest issue is the scene badge. I think that feels very gimmicky. For me, the best course of action is when you are setting up the initial game, separate threats or locations amongst everyone. When you get to that said threat or location, that MG automatically takes over. He/she has the most information about it, and is best informed at what happens.
I am not to happy about the scene badge myself. Your idea would actually require to plot out the path of the adventure before starting. I want the system to be more flexible.
I will rethink the concept. What I want to achieve is, that GMing is evenly distributed between all players and I feel that a tool is necessary to keep this in order.
One of the ideas I had was a marker that blocks you for a certain amount of “GM turns” after you have set up a scene but that’s not really as lightweight as I want the system to be.