My GM observations, or tips...if you will.

[Jedi Skyler]

[Demona]

Failure doesn't always lead to death....

That is a big thing Vanion always tries to push on people we game with. If we are losing a fight he has said many times that we should have surrendured rather then dying in a scene of blazing blasters.
_________________
So uh...I rolled a 1 on the wild die...is that good?

[garhkal]

Good point, and one i feel a lot of players don't get. Heck of thsoe i game with at gencon/origins, i think i have only had 3 or so, who DID opt to surrender rather than risk dying in a hail of blaster fire... EVEN when they knew the enemy would treat them right (like pirates out to make money)...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[scott2978]

I can say for certain that getting invested in your player's characters will go a long way to improve the quality of your games. In the last campaign I ran, I focused on each character in the group one after the other. But don't misunderstand me when I say "focused". The stories didn't focus on the PC, it was that the background elements were most familiar to that PC. For instance, in one series of adventures the group was in a part of space one of the PC was from. That PC would run into people that knew him, like as the group was on a shuttle from planet-to-planet within the system, an old lady would ask him if he was related to someone, and it would turn out that the old lady knew the PC's grandfather or something. That gave us as a group a way to tell the character's stories as well as the group's story. In another part of the campaign, the group needed to lay low for a while so one PC entered a swoop race that just happened to be taking place on one of the PC's homeworlds. The story of the characters became intertwined with the story of the group, and everyone became much more intimately familiar with all the characters of the group, not just their own character. For me "investing in the characters" doesn't mean cutting them more slack, it means getting the character really involved in the story, making their background and their history PART OF the story. Those kinds of things really make the immersion factor run high in a game. Investing in the characters and cutting them slack for botched actions or dumb decisions are two completely seperate things for me.

And a note for all you military GM's out there. Don't run your game like it's a field problem. They won't have as much fun. Take it from a combat vet who is also a GM, some of the worst GM's I've ever seen are military types that can't leave their rank at the door.

And as for GM's making poor players, I guess it's essentially true. If you GM most of the time, you will get so stuck on "your way" that you will disagree with any other. To be a good player takes moxy just like being a good GM, but it's not the same game when played from the other end of the table. When playing, try to remember what it's like to be the GM, and act like you would want your players to act.

Most of all, the whole point of playing an RPG is to have fun. If your GM style feels too strict, or if you let the PC's die too often, or if you make the game feel like the PC's are invulnerable, the game will not be fun.

Demona: I really hate making PC's surrender. It's difficult to explain how the PC's can be captured and then escape more than once or twice before the Empire or whoever starts getting wise to their tricks. It's far, far better from a GM standpoint to always let them have a way out. Though, that doesn't mean they get out scott free... Maybe someone will have to stay behind, or maybe they will have to dash through a crossfire to get to an escape pod or a door (leaving the possibility for being seriously wounded) or maybe they will have to break some bones to fit through a small opening, or take a nasty fall over being captured. There are a lot more ways to allow the PC's to run than to explain how they escaped captivity for the 12th time.

[garhkal]

[Jedi Skyler]

[garhkal]

Point taken....
SCORE:

Me: 0
Jedi Skyler: 1
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Jedi Skyler]

Hey, bro! This isn't a contest- especially between a Vet and a serviceman. This is a collaboration, where everyone comes out the winner! 8)

[KageRyu]

Excellant overall post Trusty. Here's a few of mine:
• Don't have a character die from a simple bad dice roll.
• Actions have repercussions
• NPCs should serve their own goals, even if they are allies of the Player Characters.
• Be dynamic.
• Be flexible.
• Be reasonable.
• Be understanding.
• Allow the players to shape your campaign through their actions.
• NPCs should be memorable.
• Do not kill a character if their is no reason for him to die.
• Give the players reason to trust you and know you are fair.
I had a bunch more, but my mind drew a blank when I hit the reply button.

On garhkal's post, there is much I disagree with, and much I could offer counter points too, but it has been well said by Grimace. Instead I will focus on this:

[KageRyu]