Alexis has a very thought provoking and controversial post up on Tao of D&D. The post is actually a reply to the content and comments of the previous post, so that is recommended reading as well.
Alexis tackles a lot of stuff here and I am only going to focus on one point, the essential point, which is that
a) there is a “best” way to play the game
b) there is a way to teach this method to others
c) our goal as a community of gamers should be to distribute this knowledge as much as possible.
I essentially agree with this logic. My only quibble with Alexis is that there are multiple games that each might have several methods of being played, each of which might have a “best” way. However, the number of ways is definitely a finite number. There may be three different ways to play WoD; Horror, Noir, and Action. There are not a million ways to play WoD, but there might be a million bad ways to do Noir. I’m sure I am wrong and there are more ways of playing WoD, but it certainly can’t be more than ten or so, unless you are just being too loose with categories.
I am not even sure Alexis would quibble with the above. His blog is Tao of D&D, he is clearly invested in classic sandbox D&D, so he may have assumed the limitation of his statements to classic sandbox D&D.
Before the comments become similar to Alexis’, let me add some clarification to why I support his assertions.
First, just because there is a best way doesnt mean there is only one way. Certainly, there are going to be outliers who have their own special method. This applies to anything, from cooking to sports and so on. The best way is the method for the vast majority of people.
For example, the best way to shoot a basketball is pretty well established. Anyone who coaches basketball teaches that method. Anyone who has passing exposure to basketball can even demostrate the behavior. The presence of this method doesn’t undercut the awesomeness of the dude who can make a half-court shot with one hand. But if you tried to teach everyone to shoot like that, you would be a moron.
Second, Zak raises the question to Alexis about how can it be bad if everyone is having fun? I have to agree with Alexis’ counter to Zak, that there are tons of people who are not having fun and that is who we are talking about helping. These hypothetical people having fun but playing it wrong, they are outliers like above. As Alexis says, Most people complain about not being able to find a good game. Most people are sick to death of what they can find. Speaking for myself, that is what I see a lot of on the internet as well.
Third, if anyone wants to accuse me of being elitist, I am fine with that. I suggest you read In Defense of Elitism. It only costs $1.99, throw it on your next Amazon order. I believe firmly that there are people who are better at a particular task than others and that we should celebrate that. That doesnt make them superior people in a moral sense, it makes them factually demonstrably superior in a particular way. I am a mediocre cook. I got NOTHING on my man, Christian. I am fine with acknowledging him as a superior cook. He probably acknowledges other people superior to him, and so on. The problem with gaming is that we tend to assume, in the absence of easily acquired comparison data, that everyone is equally skilled. I think that is flawed thinking that ignores everything we know about human behavior. The fact that determining relative skill levels is challenging doesn’t mean it is impossible.
Alright, so what am I doing here besides agreeing with Alexis? Well, I have a plan to accomplish what Alexis wants, which is increasing the skills of GM and thus the quality of their games. I have mentioned it before, but I don’t think people took it very seriously. I do mean it very seriously. So what is the plan?
—————————————————–
Building Better GMs:
—————————————————–
I am going to limit the task before me to a specific goal: teaching people to GM a game of Synapse in a particular way. I have designed Synapse to support this style that I am going to be pushing, just as D&D supports Alexis’ style.
I have two approaches to conquering this goal; modules and a gamemastering book.
I have developed two new methods of designing modules for play. Some people have been exposed to one of these methods via an e-mail from me some months back (Christian, Faustus, Erik, etc). The current task on my plate is developing the concept that was detailed in those e-mails into a viable final product to serve as a demonstration of that method. The Zombie Map a few posts down on this blog was developed to support the module that is in development. I am trying to keep a lot of this secret for now, but suffice to say this is a module that you could pick up having not read a single word and start a game in five minutes. No GM prep, no GM memorization, it is a truly revolutionary design. Those that have seen it can confirm that it does what I say it does, but for now the actual way that it accomplishes this needs to be kept under wraps. Yes, there will be a BIG REVEAL.
The second module method is still in concept form inside my head. Don’t expect to hear anything in the next few months, but it will be coming down the pipe sometime in the next year.
I am also beginning to assemble the philosophical basis for the GM book in outline form. This book is really complex and difficult to describe here, but suffice to say it goes far beyond what currently tries to claim that it is a GM Guide in the market. It provides the blueprint for building a GM from someone who doesnt know what they are doing, unlike the current GM guides which only really serve as reference books. Every GM guide for every game that I have ever seen is essentially a tool kit for adjudicating the rules of the game. It does not make the case for any kind of method of running a game, it is a collection of bland tips and ways to generate stats that anyone with a brain wouldnt need the book to do anyway. Those parts that could get interesting only barely scratch the surface. My book will outline actual techniques, methodology, philosophy, etc.
For example, the Synapse combat system resolves like a gunfight. In the GM book, I will talk about how you need to set up combats, how to describe placing, setting, scene. A lot of the techniques that I use are borrowed from screenwriting and cinematography. I will address issues of light & shadow, focus & depth of field, as well as dialogue and emotional pulls. I am writing this book with the assumption it will be read by someone who has no clue at all how to GM. This book will teach them how to consistently create dynamic, fun, and dramatic gameplay.
So that’s what’s on my agenda. You didnt think that I was going to just sit around doodling now that Synapse was a public beta, did you?
But I can’t very well do that because sound is integral to the game experience and the sound of a gun going off is probably not a good combination with sleeping infant.
