TheRPGSite

So, what are the fundamental skills for players and GMs, in your opinion?

Off the top of my head:

Player:

-Creating a character that fits the group, the setting, and the action.

-Portraying a consistent character.

-Make the "stuff" of the character interesting to other players.

GM

-Setting up good, interesting scenes.

-Calling the game mechanics, dice, whatever, into play when they're useful, and leaving them out when they aren't.

-Creating conflict without 'taking over' the characters, which means building conflict that fits the characters, or a clear setup for character creation where the characters will be drawn to the already-laid-down conflict, or both.

------------

There's lots more.  What else?

Skilled players will know the rules well enough that they can use them in creative and engaging ways, without overshadowing or negating other players.

All players should show good sportsmanship.

This applies to both GMs and player-characters.

You know I've found good players who played well--even without knowing the rules well. Knowing the rules isn't some kind of rank or benefit for a player as long as they're able to roll with whatever is going on in character.

It's like comparing musicians. Musician A knows all the chords of your group by heart and he can play them well. But Musician B knows how to improvise, has an ear for music and can pick up your chords in a heartbeat. While the first person is technically correct and good--once the real world intrudes he may not be able to adapt to changes, dropped tempo, or other aspects.

The best musicians probably combine traits of A and B.

Same goes for players.

Quote from: SilverlionKnowing the rules isn't some kind of rank or benefit for a player as long as they're able to roll with whatever is going on in character.

I'll argue with that.

A good knowledge of the rules can, in many games, let the player "fit in" their character more naturally to many situations.

We're walking along through some place, and there's this big pit - like, ten feet across.  I'm playing a rogue, level 4, Dex 16, maxed ranks in Jump.

How hard is it for me to jump the pit?

If I know the rules well, I don't need to ask.  I just decide what to do.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenI'll argue with that.

A good knowledge of the rules can, in many games, let the player "fit in" their character more naturally to many situations.

We're walking along through some place, and there's this big pit - like, ten feet across.  I'm playing a rogue, level 4, Dex 16, maxed ranks in Jump.

How hard is it for me to jump the pit?

If I know the rules well, I don't need to ask.  I just decide what to do.

Right. And how many real world people no how hard it is to jump a big pit ten feet across? Most people know vaguely "Man that's huge." "damn that's hard."

Your example is about playing the system--about non-character knowledge that you've made matter.

It doesn't have to matter.

A person IN THAT WORLD. Would of course take a look at the pit and estimate their chances. Then likely comment like I put above to other people, or even to themself. But the /character/ doesn't know its going to take 10 or better on a d20 roll. Hence the player doesn't need to know to play their character either--just a general "it looks hard, difficult, it will be risky.." some other common usage word to represent an estimation of their chances.

A good player isn't caring about the specific numbers. If they are, they're already headed down the rules lawyer path. (A good player will still try and jump the pit, because its in character to do so--even if they know they /might/ fail.)


When the system becomes more important to determination of player's choice, than the events IN play. I'd call any player following the rules over the character reasons, and setting events "bad".

Quote from: SilverlionA person IN THAT WORLD. Would of course take a look at the pit and estimate their chances.

Yep.

Our person is athletic, and highly experienced with jumping.  He can get a good idea of his chances.  He knows to take a run up.  He has a context that the player doesn't have.

A good player can simulate that context by knowing the rules; he doesn't need to turn into an asshole or a rules lawyer to do so.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenA good player can simulate that context by knowing the rules; he doesn't need to turn into an asshole or a rules lawyer to do so.

 A good player doesn't NEED to know the numbers to act--they will act accordingly with subsumed knowledge of who the character is--a /bad/ player is using the rules when he should be using character knowledge. Knowing the rules is not inherently bad. But it isn't NECESSARY to being a good player.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenSo, what are the fundamental skills for players and GMs, in your opinion?

Off the top of my head:

Player:

-Creating a character that fits the group, the setting, and the action.

-Portraying a consistent character.

-Make the "stuff" of the character interesting to other players.

GM

-Setting up good, interesting scenes.

-Calling the game mechanics, dice, whatever, into play when they're useful, and leaving them out when they aren't.

-Creating conflict without 'taking over' the characters, which means building conflict that fits the characters, or a clear setup for character creation where the characters will be drawn to the already-laid-down conflict, or both.

------------

There's lots more.  What else?

In a well-run RPG campaign, characters face genuine danger on a regular basis courtesy of a tough-but-fair GM and player skill is measured primarily by character survival. If Your Guy makes it to next week's session, you're a winner. If he makes it to every week's session, you're a master.

Character improvement is a good secondary measure, closely-tied to the first.

So the fundamental skills are what allows Your Guy to navigate the game world sucessfully. Primarily knowledge of its dangers and the ability to cope with them wisely and creatively. Surviving and prospering in a hostile environment.

Exactly. I'm in 100% agreement with Levi on this. Many players can make their own adjudications as long as they are familiar with the rules of the game.

A lot of times in the game this sort of thing comes up: I know I've done the jump example where I had described a chasm and (once I had given the distance across) one player looked at his character sheet for a second and then announced "I can easily make that jump" and even told me what the target number was.

Quote from: SilverlionA good player doesn't NEED to know the numbers to act--they will act accordingly with subsumed knowledge of who the character is--a /bad/ player is using the rules when he should be using character knowledge. Knowing the rules is not inherently bad. But it isn't NECESSARY to being a good player.

Totally disagree. The good player does need to know what the rules say as much as possible. But I wouldn't consider the guy who hasn't quite got the rules down a bad player. I would consider him to be a novice player.

I do agree that a good player keeps IC and OOC knowledge seperate.

Quote from: SilverlionBut it isn't NECESSARY to being a good player.

Necessary?

Fuck, no.  But it's a skill - and using it properly, to be a good player rather than a rules lawyer, is important.

Likewise, a GM can be total shit at setting up and defining scenes, leading to the "Wait, I thought we were still in the bar, what do you mean he's leaning on a cart?" problem, or the equally pissy 'scene that goes on too long' problem.  And with a group of players that are on the ball, that GM can still run one hell of a good game if their other skills are sharp, because the players can take up the slack on that one issue if need be.

But it's still a skill I think GMs should practice.

And, duh, another skill for players:

-Firewalling: When acting as the character, acting on what the character knows or should be able to get a feel for, and not on wildly out-of-character stuff.

Quote from: Abyssal MawTotally disagree. The good player does need to know what the rules say as much as possible. But I wouldn't consider the guy who hasn't quite got the rules down a bad player. I would consider him to be a novice player.

I do agree that a good player keeps IC and OOC knowledge seperate.

To me both players and GMs, while benefiting from full knowledge of the rules (especially GMs, with players I don't see it as so vital), are defined by how they handle themselves socially with the group and how they handle themselves at roleplaying.  "Knows the rules" is almost never on my top list of stuff you have to have to be a good player OR a good GM.

Stuff like "can play well with others"; "can portray his character effectively"; "good speaking skills"; "funny"; "can make characters come alive"; "GM can manage the group and any potential conflicts of interest"; etc etc.
This sort of stuff is what I find important.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Levi KornelsenAnd, duh, another skill for players:

-Firewalling: When acting as the character, acting on what the character knows or should be able to get a feel for, and not on wildly out-of-character stuff.

"firewalling"?

Call me crazy, but I think before you go around inventing new terms (or borrowing them from elsewhere if "firewalling" isn't your own) you may want to be sure that there is something in what you've said above that is different from, say: "playing in character".


Because the latter, while perhaps not as sexy, hip, or modern as "firewalling", has the benefit of being used since forever and being readily understandable.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditCall me crazy, but I think before you go around inventing new terms (or borrowing them from elsewhere if "firewalling" isn't your own) you may want to be sure that there is something in what you've said above that is different from, say: "playing in character".

I got it from Dragon Magazine.  I think....  hm.

But, whatever.  The ability to seperate that information is a skill.

What else?

What I have found is, that it is important for gms to create and sustain a specifc tone/atmosphere for the campaign, and be able to convey said tone/atmosphere to the players.

The first part maybe talent but the second part I think is a skill. For players it is important to be able to latch on to that tone and contribute to it with their roleplaying etc.

Regards,
David R

The most important thing a player needs is the ability to be a creative problem solver, who uses the givens in the Universe and his information to generate cool, intrigueing and eye-opening solutions to the encountered challenges.

GMs should have a vast amount of detail knowledge and firm understanding of politics, history, social sciences and warfare to satisfy me.
They also need the abstract skill of knowing the important from the unimportant things, so he can fast forward at the right time.

Over the years I've introduced a large number of people to the hobby (friends, family, countrymen..:) )

Some of the best players I've had were the ones least concerned with knowing the rules--some of the most innovative ones were also quite young--my neice for example who turns 8 shortly. (Of course this is the girl who would play versus  HALO, and start off with "I'm a princess come save me!" ) --why yes a big Red power armored marine cyborg princess but still. Sure she has failings being a child. Things like knowing the appropriateness of inserting some material, of sharing time to let other people be cool in play.  But its very fun to have her play games.

Quote from: YamoIn a well-run RPG campaign, characters face genuine danger on a regular basis courtesy of a tough-but-fair GM and player skill is measured primarily by character survival. If Your Guy makes it to next week's session, you're a winner. If he makes it to every week's session, you're a master.

Wow!  Every single RPG campaign?!  You learn such neat things on the internet!

-O

Quote from: obrynWow!  Every single RPG campaign?!  You learn such neat things on the internet!

-O

Every well-run one, yes. It's possible to reduce the game to a cake walk where the environment doesn't genuinely threaten the PCs at all, but this is never advisable unless you're playing Toon.

Quote from: YamoEvery well-run one, yes. It's possible to reduce the game to a cake walk where the environment doesn't genuinely threaten the PCs at all, but this is never advisable unless you're playing Toon.

Here's a hint: Not everyone likes the same things as you.  The game you describe sounds like a boring wankfest where some fatbeards congratulate each other on having the Monster Manual memorized.  Poking piles of trash to check for rot grubs and putting on a ring and jumping around got old about a decade ago.  Isn't it fun having someone deride your playstyle?

One of the biggest skills that shows up on both the GM and player side is managing spotlight time.  (I almost said camera time but thought some of you anti-cinematic people might start throwing things at me)  No one likes a glory hog, and yes it can be interesting when you get into your character and have stuff happen.  But don't try to hog the attention.  The GM should manage this, as players can do it often without realizing it, and the player should try to avoid doing it.  I usually manage by letting people do their thing and frequently cutting to different groups of PCs, so we don't force 'everyone has to be together all the time' onto the group yet still keep everyone involved.

Other than that I think Pundit nailed most of them - whatever your style getting along with others, portraying your character well, and so on will have you welcomed into almost any group.

Quote from: MaddmanHere's a hint: Not everyone likes the same things as you.  The game you describe sounds like a boring wankfest where some fatbeards congratulate each other on having the Monster Manual memorized.  Poking piles of trash to check for rot grubs and putting on a ring and jumping around got old about a decade ago.

(Takes out the sharpened car axel.)

"Jeez. It's been a while since I had to use this thing. Some asshole put bulletproof windows on his car, so I needed something that could rip through door... I really hope you're ready for a shattered pelvis."

But seriously, while death might not be strictly necessary (I'd still rather have it than not) the potential for failure is. Otherwise success gets pretty meaningless. Ever played Starcraft with all your cheats? As protoss? Then mind-controlled to get access to everything on all three tech trees? You'll succeed phenomenally. Then you'll get bored and see what's on TV. Because you didn't earn it.

Quote from: beejazz(Takes out the sharpened car axel.)

"Jeez. It's been a while since I had to use this thing. Some asshole put bulletproof windows on his car, so I needed something that could rip through door... I really hope you're ready for a shattered pelvis."

But seriously, while death might not be strictly necessary (I'd still rather have it than not) the potential for failure is. Otherwise success gets pretty meaningless. Ever played Starcraft with all your cheats? As protoss? Then mind-controlled to get access to everything on all three tech trees? You'll succeed phenomenally. Then you'll get bored and see what's on TV. Because you didn't earn it.

Umm, I agree?  I don't really see what that has to do with what you quoted though.  I was being a jerkass because Yamo was being a jerkass.  I even enjoy that kind of game too, I'm a fan of All Flesh Must Be Eaten which is very much a 'count your ammo and think of contingencies' kind of game.  It's just that I don't think I have the One True Way To Game or anything.  I like different kinds of styles for different reasons, and what makes for a good time in game A will suck the life out of game B.

Quote from: MaddmanUmm, I agree?  I don't really see what that has to do with what you quoted though.  I was being a jerkass because Yamo was being a jerkass.  I even enjoy that kind of game too, I'm a fan of All Flesh Must Be Eaten which is very much a 'count your ammo and think of contingencies' kind of game.  It's just that I don't think I have the One True Way To Game or anything.  I like different kinds of styles for different reasons, and what makes for a good time in game A will suck the life out of game B.

Well, if being an asshole justifies being an asshole...

And it wouldn't necessarily seem that you agreed on this point, given that you went out of your way to attack Yamo for suggesting essentially the same thing, not only calling him a fatbeard but pissing on my parade by mocking the standard dungeon crawl.

Quote from: beejazzWell, if being an asshole justifies being an asshole...

And it wouldn't necessarily seem that you agreed on this point, given that you went out of your way to attack Yamo for suggesting essentially the same thing, not only calling him a fatbeard but pissing on my parade by mocking the standard dungeon crawl.

No I don't agree with him.  Yamo's position is that you have to kill off characters left and right or you don't run a good game.  He is the aribter of that which is good and bad in gaming, and us lesser mortals should listen to his wisdom.  You'd said that there should be consequences for actions, something totally different that I agree with.

I got no problems if people want to do dungeon crawls.  Not my cup of tea but I've done plenty in my time.  Just don't go around saying that a dungeon crawl (or anything else) is the One True Path Of Gaming.  If I wanted people telling me their way was right and everyone else's was wrong I'd be on the Forge.  :p

Quote from: Levi KornelsenThere's lots more.  What else?

I would add all the story-telling skills to the GM's list: being able to describe settings and characters precisely and evocatively. Handling timing including dramatic and comic timing. Being able to provide a sense of clarity about fast-moving or confusing events through choice of words and gestures.

Having a sense of when to move things along.

Like that.

Cheers,
-E.

Good GM skills:

• Having a feel for pacing.  When to keep things moving and when to slow things down.
• Critical social observation.  Being able to recognize how the players are reacting, to what, and why.
• A firm command of language.  As GM you need to communicate ideas clearly.
• Communication skills. You have to be able to (and willing to) talk to your players.  Anything you can't learn from critical social observation, you'll have to gain by communication.
• Improvisation skills.  Learning to be flexible is absolutely necessary.  Thinking on your feet is required because players do not stay within boundaries.
• A good grasp of the game.  Setting, mechanics, and how to work with it all to get the results that work best for you and the game.  Know your material inside and out.

Player skills:

Shows up on time
Is a good fellow to be around
Knows the rules

Everything else varies by system. I don't give a fuck if you roleplay when we're doing Zombie Island or some dungeon crawl, and I'd rather you didn't if we're playing 40K. I'd like some characterisation if we're playing FATE or high-falutin' D&D campaigns. So long as you're not an irresponsible dumb cunt, you've got everything you need to be a player.

GM:

Know what everyone is interested in
Keep the adventure/session moving towards what people are interested in
Is a good person to be around.

Simple enough, really.