Team GMing

So our gaming group has had a few end-of-session conversations about doing some sort of team or collaborative GMing. I remembering trying a variation on the theme back in high school, with a common set of characters flitting from GM setting to GM setting. Each session featured a different GM, using the GM's own setting, but the characters had the (unexplained) ability to move from world to world. I also played in a session in college where the GM tasks rotated from moment to moment during a single session--it was one of the better gaming sessions I have played in, but it was also the only one for me that involved a significant amount of alcohol.

It turns out that Wikipedia, the final arbiter of knowledge in our current age, has an article on this, calling it the Troupe System. Wikipedia summarizes the Troupe System this way: A Troupe system is a way of playing role-playing games which spreads the game master's responsibilities among each of the players. The term was coined in Ars Magica. It is also known as collaborative role-playing, a term used by other games with a similar mechanism.

Thanks to +Chris C. (The Clash of Spear on Shield) for sharing the Wikipedia link with me, as well as a few other links. Here are some other links:

Troupe System (Wikipedia)

Troupe Style GMing and the Gaming Charter (Gnome Stew)

Troupe Style (Project Redcap)

Starting To Collaborate (Collaborative Roleplay)

And my own blog post from yesterday was a lead-in to this post: Microscope and the Books of Bardo

How Do You Start and End Campaigns?

"Why, yes, it is a Calabi-Yau space."

My question is really about how you think about the end of a campaign when you are starting it...hopefully that makes sense.

Do you: (a) just start and plan on playing until it fizzles out at some point? (b) Start with a time limit in mind but only a vague idea of how to end the campaign and then figure it out as you go? (c) Start with a series of options for the ending and then see which direction the players go? (d) Start with a clear destination and end in view? (e) Or is it None Of The Above?

RPG Campaigns: Why They Fly, Why They Flop

Flight or flop?

I make no claims to expert knowledge on any subject, save procrastination (someday I will get around to writing a post about that topic). However, I have been involved in my share of successful campaigns as a player or GM. I have also been there to witness a few flops firsthand. So I thought I would post a few observations on why some campaigns seem to take off while others flop.

I suppose "successful campaign" needs a bit of definition. My Dr. Handwave definition of success is anything that the participants enjoyed and would do again. My Dr. Handwave definition of campaign is an multi-session game that involves the same setting and a continuity of players and adventure arcs.

In general, I would have to say that the successful campaigns I have been involved with were based on three factors: (1) Players getting along with each other; (2) Commitment of players and GM to meet on a schedule for more than a few sessions; and (3) Shared participation and enjoyment in the creative process that is a part of tabletop RPG gaming.

I am sure there are lots of other reasons that I could identify, but those are my big three. I think you have to have #1 and #2, to get to #3, but #3 is not an automatic outcome. I also think the challenge is that #1 and #2 are about the individuals, not about the setting or system. Get the wrong people together? It won't work. Get the right people together but through in too many scheduling complications? It won't work either.

I have experienced several flops, both as GM and as a player. It is easier to identify a specific reason for failure than a specific reason for success. Here are two flops and one fizzle:

Flop #1: My worst flop as a GM was the result of using a series of adventure paths. "Series" is a misnomber because we never made it through the first. It was a bad match with my GM style and an even worse match for the players. Having a GM who is "meh" on the whole thing doesn't get the players very enthusiastic.

Flop #2: I tried to get my old gaming group from high school back together via Skype. It was really fun for two sessions and then the reality of schedules started working against us. No one could commit to more than one night a month and the odds were against us finding a common night every month. We maybe had two more sessions over five months. One of the guys was in community theater, another guy did shift work, and I was in another gaming group plus was out and about playing music.

Fizzle #1: My in-house face-to-face Castles & Crusades campaign was a great success until half the group (the kids) all went off to college, leaving the rest of us (the parents) staring at empty chairs. I don't view this as a flop, but I do wish I would have had some sort of big ending to wrap things up. Instead, it fizzled with a lot of loose ends.

What has been your experience with campaigns? Why have your successes been successful? What were the reasons for your flops?

[Note: Whatever thinking that is behind this post was triggered by Peter D's post, What Would You Change if You Could Reboot Your Campaign?]