Comments on: Episode 175 – why John loves and hates his PCs

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 08:50:11 +0000

Thanks, Dave! I’m really glad to hear you enjoyed the episode, and I appreciate you taking the time to write that.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 19:02:34 +0000

I’ve been listening to you guys for a few years now, and this episode is one of the few that I keep without deleting. Out of the 100+ episodes that I’ve listened to, this is easily my favorite. Kudos to everyone involved.

By: pagan

pagan — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:31:24 +0000

GMing has made me a better, more appreciative player. If you are intimidated by GMing for the first time, try running a game for new players, especially younger players (teens) that may have few hang-ups with “role playing”, and won’t know if you are “messing up”.

I whole-heartedly agree that “winning” means having fun and being part of a great story telling experience. That’s the one unique aspect about RPGs that cannot be overstated.

John’s likes/dislikes are a good checklist to set expectations for a new game and/or new players.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:57:24 +0000

With a cast of programmer, doctor, and lawyer types, I’m amazed not one of you is pedantic enough to not use PC as a synonym for player. PC is to player as NPC is to GM, dammit!

By: The Aberrant

The Aberrant — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:48:05 +0000

This was one of your best episodes ever. I might make it required reading (hearing?) for my players.

And, for the record, Maptools rules! You really couldn’t ask for a better program at that price, and they have a good community helping out as well.

By: JOHNKELLY

JOHNKELLY — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 02:23:34 +0000

Good episode guys! John, I love your theory about GMs making better players.

Dan, while I agree that human nature is to win, I think that this doesn’t apply to Role-Playing Games since the purpose of Role Playing Games isn’t to win. The point of a role playing game is to tell a story that is interesting and draws the players in. Or else it would simply be a combat simulator. If someone is sitting down to play a game so that they can just win by surviving the GMs wrath as you put it, then that is (again as you said) retarded and, frankly you are just playing the game wrong. If you don’t want to tell a story, play the board game Descent instead.

By: Heiner

Heiner — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 15:10:55 +0000

I didn’t listen to the episode yet, but my RSS reader shortened the title of the episode to “why John loves and hates his P”, and somehow I assumed the last word would be “penis”.

That would have been an episode I’d listen to right away.

Just saying.

By: The_Vecnian

The_Vecnian — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 04:40:09 +0000

Wow…what a session guy’s! I tend to agree that GM’s as players are often good players…. however that said… Good GM’s / DM’s also tend have the uncanny ability to foresee where you are wanting to go with a story line and have the ability to screw the direction of the game (of course this is done just to see how the GM / DM handles the situation). Now in my particular case I’m rather good at adlib and getting them back on general course. However I’ve been in other session where the GM / DM are clueless how to handle this kind of situation.

Killing characters happens and it’s your job as a GM or DM to weave the formerly dead player characters new PC / NPC into the storyline and joining them into the group with the current hero’s.

Adlib provokes true roll playing and builds excellent material but creating too many sub plots end up like reading a Robert Jordan book. Who I truly like….but you get a sub plot that you wanted more of and you never get it resolved.

By: Triggerhappy938

Triggerhappy938 — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 21:54:00 +0000

Everytime you bring up this nonsense about GM rights, my players beat me. I just want you to know that.

By: Aki

Aki — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 11:02:20 +0000

In my experience, people who GM are not always that good players. They seem to base too much of their expectations on how they would handle a situation, completely disregarding the differences in style and approach to running games.

One fairly extreme example of this would be a frequent GM who played in one of my games and got killed while attacking an opponent who I had underlined to be extremely dangerous. The player felt that because we had killed one such being in his game, he should be able to do the same, although I (and other players) were actively discouraging him from trying that. He died on the first round of combat and dragged another character with him.

Also, I am going to plagiarize the idea of GM Bill of Rights and will try to come up with one with my local gaming society/club/association.

By: Munimortal

Munimortal — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:33:06 +0000

I have had a bit of experience with this lately. I have 4 non-gamer friends who I have been introducing to RPGs (using 4E because its simple). Before we even rolled up characters I explained to them the whole idea of a GM. I always use the videogame analogy that I am merely the computer, the guy who runs the world and the monsters, but instead of trying to beat them, the GM creates a world for which they, the main characters, exist in. I find that its best to get them early, and too see the GM as a source of information on how the game works, or to explain the ramifications of their actions. Get em early is my advice. BTW, win for John for the SimGolf reference.