Whats your RP style?

[Charakan]

Basically I was thinking of joining a local club or running some sessions at a store to widen my RP circle, the problem I have is that in the past I've been pretty choosy about the people I game with, right now I'm just running some one on ones for a friend who has some experience of gaming, its a man hunt that involves an ex scout pilot turned PI chasing an embezzler whose trying to flee the marches with his ill gotten gains, it runs well.

The problem I'm having is that basically I want to run straight up adventure tales of the kind I devoured as a kid, my RP style - to borrow some terms MMO is light to moderate, IC chat and a bit of acting but I don't really want to game with anyone who wants to spend four hours having an IC chat about theology with a priest on a primitive planet, so I'm thinking if I make a move to play with other gamers I should probably be up front about the type of games I want to run.

But it got me wondering about my fellow Traveller players whats your RP style and what type of games do you run?

 

[rust]

I think I could be called a "moderate simulationist" with a faible for "hard"
science fiction stories which include much exploration, diplomacy, politics
and economy, but only few combat scenarios.

Most of my settings focus on the events on a single, well detailed planet,
where the characters are more or less important members of the local
society with duties and resposibilities, not carefree wanderers.

I rarely use structured adventures, my settings usually are "sandboxes",
and I see rules only as proposals, not as laws.

 

[hdan]

For me, both when playing an GM-ing, I prefer a more story driven experience, where the GM tells a story and players tell what they do at various intervals. The players can go IC or not as they like, but the GM is expected to do NPCs IC to some extent. Sandboxing is just fine, and Traveller's tradition of randomly generated encounters and patrons supports that very well as long as the GM is up to the improvisation required.

For rules usage, I follow the principle that as long as the player's character has some skill in what they are trying to accomplish, I only make them roll if failure would make the game more interesting, or if a high degree of success will help the party in a meaningful way. Pilots don't need to roll to dock with a space station, though they will to dock with a damaged ship in a decaying orbit. (In the second case, each failure costs precious time....)

 

[Sturn]

I'm also more of a simulationist (I wonder if Traveller/scifi rpg gamers lean that way more so then fantasy gamers?). Rust, other then the limited amount of combat, I think I would fit in well with your style. Wished you lived down the street.

As a player, I've always liked the idea of, "If I was this person with such and such abilities in this setting, what would I do?"

As a referee, I've tended to not force in-character talk. If it broke out, great. It tended not to in lengthly amounts in the circles I've played with. In-character chat usually occurs only in special conversations. The norm is ooc. I think my players have gotten used to me from time to time switching to in-character for an important conversation with an NPC, then back to normal ooc play.

Normal play, in a store looking for a new rifle:

Player: Do I find an ACR in the shop?
Me: Yes, it is listed at 800 Credits.
Player: Can I haggle with the shop keeper?
Me: You can try, but it doesn't appear like a shop where bargaining is the norm, usually only set prices are accepted. So, only a really good roll would allow a price reduction, a bad roll might piss the shopkeep off.
Player: Ok, I'm nearly broke I'm going to try anyway (rolls).

Swapping to in-character when the shopkeeper offers a job:

Me: After you buy the rifle, the shopkeeper glances at the front door then motions you quietly to follow him into the back of the store.
Player: Ok, umm, I follow.
Me: So, I noticed the 125th crest on your holster. Merc right? I've got something a lot more interesting then an ACR if you're game.
Player: Damn straight I'm game!
Me: Ok, but two things. First, keep this quiet of course. Second, I'm not looking for credits, I've got a little job for you....

No in-depth roleplaying, just in-character talk when it is appropriate.

 

[rust]

Rust, other then the limited amount of combat, I think I would fit in well with your style.

While I am not exactly keen on combat scenarios, because they often
turn into roll-playing instead of role-playing, the lack of them in my set-
tings is more a result of a specific "player culture".

It is just a waste of time and effort to prepare combat scenes for players
who always search for non-violent solutions to their characters' problems,
and I do not want to force scenes they obviously do not want to play upon
them.

 

[Charakan]

I take it by simulationist you guys are relating to GNS, just googled simulationist RP style and it came up with that, I was away from the hobby for along time so wasn't familiar with the term but thats definitely my style.

I didn't express light to moderate RP in the correct manner, in the online games I played it usually refers to a mix IC and OOC chat, my apologies for not expressing it very well.

I'm more of a story driven player than a sandboxer, but I've had some really good sessions with my old group that I played Mega Traveller with, when they went and did something I never expected and had to wing it, but then again we knew each other very well so I think that contributed, then again, I've never had a player turn an initial plot hook I threw at them.

 

[Sturn]

While on the subject, as a referee I've always been against adventures that are on rails for the players. What I mean is when I create a scenario, I don't set down exactly step by step what the players will be doing. I have the maps, enemies, NPCs, etc prepared before hand, but I never want it to seem the players are only going for a ride while I present my story to them. Complete open-ended scenarios.

I also never fudge on rolls (really).

Putting the two above togather means the players really feel they have accomplished something when they use their minds to get through an objective. No feeling of just along for the ride. No feeling that the referee made sure we won.

 

[Charakan]

I tend to create a loose outline of the chronology and the way I think it should go (it usually never does!) detailed descriptions of key locations, maps and NPCs. The only detailed piece of the scenario thats read aloud to the players is the initial hook, after that I tend to improvise the scenes based on the players actions. I give the players the pitch and see where it goes from there, by story instead of sandbox I don't have an area mapped out and say to the players do what you want, the scenario has a clear goal, but its up to them how they go about achieving it, my campaigns tend to be episodic rather than have on overarching plot, I tend not to plan things to far in advance in case I have to scrap a lot of prep.

Currently, in my manhunt game, the scenarios tend to involve finding the clues to where the fugitive has gone next, with a few side encounters and adventures thrown in to try and give things a bit of variation. The problem I have is that RPGs are really supposed to be played with a group of players so having just one player is leaving me struggling to add some variety in a game where just one PC has a limited set of skills. I'm not sure how much longer I can keep things up without things getting too repetitive.

 

[Treebore]

My play style?

No nasty subjects, such as detailed sex, acts of perversion, etc...

No munchkin power gamers, they can go play with the other kids.

Group play, open plot lines, role play as much as is needed, fight when needed.

First, foremost, and last, FUN!!

 

[hdan]

The level of railroading I would put my players through depends on the maturity of the players. When I'm running a game for pre-teen kids (as I'm doing at the moment - don't worry, they're my kids, LOL), I give them "exit ramps" from the plot but mostly run the game like a computer RPG like Mass Effect. They have some options, but they know that they ought to try to complete the mission(s) given to them. Once they're more familiar with the way the universe and game system works I will probably "open up" a bit.

 

[OddjobXL]

I'm more a player than a GM. In MMOs I'm a pretty hardcore roleplayer, or can be, by the standards of MMO roleplaying. That I'm capable of it doesn't mean that I'm always doing it or that I'd force my RP on players that don't. Nothing annoys me more than the MMO roleplayer who gets all "Colonial Williamsburg" on an unassuming player asking how some system works.

"I do not know of this "log out", prithee, perhaps we should ask yon forester?"

Not that roleplayers in MMOs really talk like that (anymore) but you get the idea.

I haven't played tabletop in a very long time (maybe going on 20 years?) but I can tell you my favorite experiences tended to be mashups of sandbox and storytelling. Our genius storyteller/DM/GM guy would read the players and weave their intentions, NPCs, bios and subplots into the fabric of his universe. Now, very often some contact would give us a mission and it would be more or less straightforward.

Over time, though, there were so many recurring NPCs, locales, subplots and unfinished business that it became one big spiderweb of self-reinforcing immersion. Almost nothing would be simple, without a surprise whether induced by a player character or the DM. Over time, more and more of the plots were induced by the decisions or personal goals of one or more player characters.

I can't say it was fully sandbox because our GM did create themes and stories he wanted to explore. However he never railroaded anyone. What he did was create adventures that the player characters, based on both player inclination and character backstory, would naturally go for. And if we charged off the reservation, at times, he'd go along with us and decorate the route. Always tomorrow to get back on track assuming 'on track' was as much fun as what we were getting up to by being lost.

 

[Charakan]

I can relate to what your saying about RP Nazis in online games, OddJobXL, strangely enough it was MMOs that got me back into tabletop gaming. I hadn't played a tabletop game in a good ten or eleven years.

I was buying some Cthulhu stuff in a shop here in Notts the other week and some guys in there asked me to run a game for them, but really I want to run Traveller, I like reading CoC books but I don't really feel like playing it these days, CoC is my second favourite RPG after Traveller, I guess because they were the games we played the most when I was a teenager.

I don't think I'm a particularly good GM, its just that the job is usually thrust upon me as its the only way I'll get a game.

 

[IanBruntlett]

Hi Charakan,

I was buying some Cthulhu stuff in a shop here in Notts the other week and some guys in there asked me to run a game for them, but really I want to run Traveller, I like reading CoC books but I don't really feel like playing it these days, CoC is my second favourite RPG after Traveller, I guess because they were the games we played the most when I was a teenager.

Looks like you're in luck! According to Mongoose' web site...
Something approaches, a thing on an orbit from far away. Seemingly a large shard of dark matter, this object is known in obscure prophecy as the Chthonian Star. It is a thing that has been traveling through the universe on its oblique trajectory for millions, if not billions, of years. It is a part of the natural cycle of things, on its eon-long orbit. The Chthonian Star is the thing that caused the end of the dinosaurs, among other things. Now, again, it is awakening things long thought lost or dead, things that have slumbered awaiting its return.

Created by WildFire, the team behind the award-winning CthulhuTech, Chthnonian Stars is an original setting for Traveller. It brings a Lovecraftian flair to the Traveller family of products, in a near future setting where mankind has expanded out into our solar system, where old things are beginning to awaken.


See http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/detail.php?qsID=1877

Have fun

 

[Charakan]

Thanks for the heads up Ian, its definitely something I'd buy, appreciated mate .

 

[AndrewW]

Thanks for the heads up Ian, its definitely something I'd buy, appreciated mate .

There's information on this in Signs & Portents issues #81 and #82.

 

[Charakan]

There's information on this in Signs & Portents issues #81 and #82.

Thanks for the info Andrew, just had a look at the articles and it looks right up my street plus it might have some rules that could be adapted to a 3I setting.

 

[AndrewW]

Thanks for the info Andrew, just had a look at the articles and it looks right up my street plus it might have some rules that could be adapted to a 3I setting.

No problem. Hope it works well for you after it gets released.