Welcome New Readers Stories By Issue Volume 4, Number 1 Volume 3, Number 2 Volume 3, Number 1 Volume 2, Number 5 Volume 2, Number 4 Volume 2, Number 3 Volume 2, Number 2 Volume 2, Number 1 The Roving Gamer's Corner E-mail Us
©1998 by Matthew Strumpf and Mark Christopher

This page last updated Tuesday, 06-Sep-2005 12:28:19 EDT.

Role Playing News

Editorials, Commentaries, and Reviews:

• Editorial: Play-by-mail RPG's
  
• From the Editor
  
• Gaming: A GM's Perspective
  
• How to be Submissive
  
• Reality Quest: An Overview
  
• Champions: A Game Review
  

Play-by-mail RPG's

We've had two recent attempts to start PBM RPGs, with apparently little success. I was thinking as to why this is, and came up with a fairly simple conclusion: a play-by-mail RPG simply isn't that interesting. Granted, if none of us has the chance for face-to-face (FTF) RPGs, I could see how we would go to a PBM version, just to be able to do some playing, but as there are games out there, a PBM version just can't compete. They just couldn't have the excitement or player-involvement level of an FTF game.

It would likely be more work for a GM to make each "session" of a PBM as exciting as a comparable FTF game just by the amount of description he'd have to send back to each player. Also, there's the problems of what to do when the characters get into situations not anticipated by the players? True, the GM could work off of how the character was developed, i. e. "Playing in character" for the player. Not all players would be satisfied by this method, of course, and it would slow down the whole game if the GM tries to resolve the situation(s) by making the game-time increments small to give the player more involvement in the descision-making process.

I don't mean to knock those who have thought of trying to run such games. It's just that I've found that they generally don't work, even in such a "PBM-friendly" environment as e-mail (in which I've played a couple), and thought I'd address the issue as it seems to be a current (if not a hot) topic.

From the Editor

I am pleased to announce the joining of two of our players. Robert Mandeville and Julia Berendes have announced their engagement. The editors of RPN wish them the best, and hope that their marriage is a happy one.

This month we have many exciting stories and a few reviews. I hope you like what we have put together. We have many new readers joining us, both in print and now on our web page. To both, welcome.

As always I look forward to your input. RPN could not be done without support from of our many readers. We also are interested in sending RPN to anyone who might be interested in role-playing. If you know someone who might be interested in role-playing, let us know and we will send then a new reader's copy of RPN. Then they can decide if they want to be added to our mailing list. Also, if for some reason you have lost interest in RPN, then please help us out by asking to be taken off the mailing list.

I want to thank the other editors of Role Playing News. Mark Christopher, John Reardon and Andi Woodring have done an amazing job at getting this newsletter out each month. I was not able to work much on this issue and yet we still have pages full of interesting reading for you.

This issue marks the one year anniversary of Role Playing News. It has been a great year, that has been full of diversity and creativity. I look forward to the next year. RPN has helped in making several goals of our role-playing groups reachable. It is the communication tool that we have been looking for. It looks like RPN will only grow and improve in the upcoming year.

Gaming: A GM's Perspective

Someone brought up to me the question of the GM's place in an RPG. Specifically, is the GM there primarily for the other players, or is his/her primary reason for being there to have fun him/herself? Naturally, I quickly replied that the GM is there for both reasons. The question did get me thinking, however (I know, it's rare!), so I've decided to go more in depth on the question here in RPN.

I can only speak form what little experience I have, but the subject matter of the game has to be of interest to the GM, even more so than the players. In my game, I've got my players playing themselves, all caught up in a big supernatural conspiracy (though they don't know it yet). I had no idea what the players would think of such a game (and still don't, really), especially with an untested system and new GM. However, I figured that the more I immersed myself in the game-world, the better I would make it for the players. Only now am I realizing the amount of work I have to do! However, thinking up the plot for this game is great. It is almost like writing a story, only it's one where I know the beginning and have an idea for the ending (whichever form it will take), but I have almost no idea whatsoever how it will get there. This is the 'fun for the GM' part, creating the world, and then letting the characters loose in it and see what they do. I have to say, I've been genuinely surprised at times at what some of my players have done.

Naturally, a role-playing game would be nothing without players. It's the job of the GM to make whatever game he/she happens to be running fun for them, period. However, the players have to reciprocate in getting involved in the game. It's no fun for the GM to have written up a story/scenario/whatever, and have the players ho-hum through it without any interest (I'm not saying I've seen this happen in my game!). If the gamers all seriously think the game isn't going well, or should go in such-and-such a direction, it is up to them to let the GM know, and up to the GM to listen. However, this is also a game for the game master, as I've said, and it all comes down to the GM being able to have fun with it. You will never see me running a super-heroic game, for example, even if all the players pestered me half to death to run one, simply because I'd be bored out of my gourd running it. It's not something I'd have interest in. In retrospect, I'm glad that I've had a chance to GM (and look forward to doing it for a while), but I realize that the GM has to make a fun game for the players, but only doing so in such a way that the game is fun for him/her to run. I suppose that knowing how to do that, and being able to join the two, are the basic requirements for a decent game.

How to be Submissive

We at RPN always love to hear from our readers. However, there are some guidelines that we would like you to follow. This is to help us to save time in publishing and reduce duplication of effort.

If you are going to take the time to type your article into a computer, then you can help us by sending your writing in an electronic form. The best way is to send us the story by e-mail. If you can not do that, then we would be happy to trade disks. Stop by and let us copy your story, or mail us your disk and we will mail one back. Call us and we can talk about what format we need your work in.

If you do not have access to a computer, typed or neatly written is fine. If you visit regularly then you may use one of our machines. Give us a call, we can work something out.

Also, when submitting, please include your name, the title of your piece and a way for us to contact you. We do not ghost write, but we are happy to help you with your article if we can. We reserve the right not to publish anything that we do not feel is appropriate.

We look forward to hearing form you and welcoming you to our family.

Reality Quest: An Overview

This is the first in a hoped-for series of articles on various GMs' game worlds.

Reality Quest. Yes, I know it's an unusual name, but it was coined by one of the players, and I figure that they know best. Now, as to the world itself...

Reality Quest is, superficially, the world we live in today. Indeed, in the current game, I'm having the players make up characters based upon themselves. However, there are differences between the world as we know it and the world in RQ. The fundamental one is that magic is a real force in RQ. Indeed, there are many people who don't believe in it still, as it only seems to have appeared about 10 or so years ago. Naturally, this enables the players to be able to take characters who can use magic (or psi powers, or various other options). This may also beg the question of just how magic reappeared in the world. Since I'm not about to give the players such an unreasonable advantage, it also means that various creatures that need magic to survive are also showing up. Most other differences between the real world and RQ are products of the reappearance of magic.

At its heart, I'm trying to make RQ a grim game. The return of magic has caused a certain amount of social upheaval, exacerbated by the fact that most people are denying its existence, especially the government (at least publicly). This has caused a general distrust (if not actual persecution) of those believed to dabble in the magical arts. This, like any sort of bigotry, will tend to stratify the population, especially since the ability to use magic isn't at all common. The various "hauntings" or "sightings" caused by apparently mythical (and often horrible) creatures simply adds to it. Naturally, there are also those trying to benefit from the whole situation. As a whole, the world is falling apart. One of the skills I am most trying to gain as a GM is my descriptive technique, so I can properly convey the atmosphere of society, the bleakness and hopelessness that is (or is becoming) prevalent. We're not at something like Cyberpunk yet, but we definitely seem on our way.

As you may guess, there are some very specific and very dark forces lurking in the backround. Indeed, the whole point of the game is to learn about and deal with them. I myself, while obviously not being able to go into details, don't really know all the ramifications of what I've set up as the fundamental plot, though I have some pretty good ideas of what the main ones are. As I said, the world of RQ is grim.

Well, I know this just barely touches the surface of Reality Quest, but I can hardly go into some of the deeper meanings, reasons, differences or events until the current campaign is over. However, I do hope that this will not only help to give a clearer picture to the players of the world they are in, but also show how one GM has tried to put together a story and a world.

Champions: A Game Review

Champions is almost unique among RPGs in that it is a meta-system; that is, it allows you to create almost any type of characters or NPCs you can imagine, all within a concrete set of rules. For GMs who want to allow any sort of characters the players can think of (with or without various limits), and for players with ideas for such characters, this can be a godsend.

When designing a character, all of the statistics (and I think there are about 12 of them) start at the "normal human average" of 10. Not only can you buy up (or sell off) any of your stats, but you can also buy various powers or gadgets, and get points back by subjecting yourself to various disadvantages. Since the rules allow almost anything you could think of (from a medieval knight to a ghost to a super-hero), the game is one of the most flexible there is. Indeed, it was originally conceived to be a super-hero game system.

The system works well, and as far as I can see has no major flaws. However, there are two things that I don't like about the system. The first is the amount of work that you have to do to actually make the characters. It can take upwards of a couple of hours if you are unfamiliar with the system and have a relatively complex character (in terms of abilities/disadvantages). The amount of number-crunching and min-maxing only makes this worse. The second is the fact that since all of the abilities are defined, the descriptions the GM gives once the game starts lose some of their effect. A ghost is now just an NPC (or a PC) with "desolid, always on," and so on.

As a whole, the Champions system (and Hero, for the non-super games) are decent systems, good for gamers who want to be able to create a lot within a solid framework of rules, but they may be too much for people who don't feel the need for all of that, or who don't want to bother with the large amount of work it would take.