Re: GM Participation

From: "Greg Ellis" <gnellis@ifn.net>

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000

This issue has always fascinated me. In particular because in the games I
run ("Fire On The Suns" and "A Sea Of Stars") the GM (usually me) frequently
has to step in and run Non-Player Races (NPRs).

I believe that a GM must be as impartial as possible and as honest as
possible when running NPRs in any game. But, the GM must also play the NPRs,
if not to the absolute best of his ability, such that they present the
players with a host of challenges. One method I do in Fire On The Suns is to
avoid looking at a player's turn until I've entered the movement data and
economics for the NPRs (all of 'em) for the turn. That way, I can be assured
that I don;t have advance knowledge of what the player is doing for that
turn.

Now, the fact that I designed the game and know all of the starting setups
intimately DOES play a part, there's no doubt or denying this fact. In
additon, I see all the players turns eventually so I end up knowing pretty
much everything that's going on in a game.

Nevertheless, I think it's a GM's responsibility to run an "honest" game. If
my players didn't think I was running an honest game, they wouldn;t be
flocking to me in the numbers they are currently. They wouldn;t actively be
trying to contribute their own ideas to the game (something I actively
encourage). They'd see a dishonest GM and a dishonest game and that would be
the end of that.

Just my $0.02 worth.

Thanks,
Greg Ellis
Designer & GM, Fire On The Suns and A Sea Of Stars
http://www.fireonthesuns.com

References

GM Participation (was Re: VOTE: Your primary method of diplomacy)
David J Porter <porterd@netaccess.co.nz>
Fri, 26 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: GM Participation (was Re: VOTE: Your primary method of diplomacy)
skrenta@pbm.com (Rich Skrenta)
Fri, 26 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: GM Participation (was Re: VOTE: Your primary method of diplomacy)
David J Porter <porterd@netaccess.co.nz>
Sat, 27 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000