Here’s a pitfall of running a game online (at least for me): it’s much harder to read the table. FtF, I’m pretty good at assessing how a thing is going over, and adjusting on the fly as necessary. I feel a little vulnerable as a GM in the online play space, because I don’t have access to the same (for lack of a better way of putting it) “table energy.” It’s a learning process like anything else, I guess.
I suspect the bridge between GM inputs and player expectations is crossed more easily online by everyone at the table being more vocal. If a thing is not working, we should stop and fix it. No one’s feelings are going to be hurt (least of all mine).
Above all, I want people to feel like they are contributing productively to the fiction. If, as the GM, I am fucking that up, I really want to know about it.
And to clarify: our online games have been really fun so far, and I’m excited to see how that aspect of our community develops. I just like to analyze my flaws and vulnerabilities so I can avoid them next time.
And to clarify: our online games have been really fun so far, and I’m excited to see how that aspect of our community develops. I just like to analyze my flaws and vulnerabilities so I can avoid them next time.
There is definitely a trade-off for the convenience. One of my frustrations with Hangouts, Skype, et al is the way they operate when several people want to talk at once. There is just enough of a delay that it causes a lot of stops and starts as people figure out who has the verbal right of way.
There is definitely a trade-off for the convenience. One of my frustrations with Hangouts, Skype, et al is the way they operate when several people want to talk at once. There is just enough of a delay that it causes a lot of stops and starts as people figure out who has the verbal right of way.
Ray Otus I can mostly cope with tech issues, but it’s definitely going to take a little time to translate my normal table manner to Hangouts. I am discovering there are so many things I depend on – facial cues, body position, inflection, that sort of thing – to both telegraph what I mean, and to also interpret how players are feeling about things. It’s certainly not an impossible task, just something to adjust to. For example, something I like to do at the table is physically lean-in, or twist up my body, to give expression to NPCs and other environmental details. That isn’t something you can do on Hangouts. I’ll have to rely more on voice work and description, I guess.
Ray Otus I can mostly cope with tech issues, but it’s definitely going to take a little time to translate my normal table manner to Hangouts. I am discovering there are so many things I depend on – facial cues, body position, inflection, that sort of thing – to both telegraph what I mean, and to also interpret how players are feeling about things. It’s certainly not an impossible task, just something to adjust to. For example, something I like to do at the table is physically lean-in, or twist up my body, to give expression to NPCs and other environmental details. That isn’t something you can do on Hangouts. I’ll have to rely more on voice work and description, I guess.
I feel you. I feel like one of my strengths as a GM is being able to read the table and respond to it fluidly: reading people, engaging everyone, and shifting gears when it feels right. It is definitely harder online. It takes a different kind of rhythm, I think, but I’d hardly say I’m an expert at it.
I feel you. I feel like one of my strengths as a GM is being able to read the table and respond to it fluidly: reading people, engaging everyone, and shifting gears when it feels right. It is definitely harder online. It takes a different kind of rhythm, I think, but I’d hardly say I’m an expert at it.
“Rhythm” is a good word.
“Rhythm” is a good word.
One of the things I learned from Lowell Francis was to verbally check in with players. “Is that cool?” or “What do you think?” He even asks about ending scenes, “This feels like an end of scene, doesn’t it?”
It seems odd at first, but man, it’s nice for me as a player to have input after a hard move. And it’s nice for me as a GM to know the players are good with what’s happening after I check in.
As for physical presence to add flavor to NPCs, I don’t think that is impossible over Hangouts. It takes more familiarity with your camera angle and relationship to the camera. It’s doable, but different.
One of the things I learned from Lowell Francis was to verbally check in with players. “Is that cool?” or “What do you think?” He even asks about ending scenes, “This feels like an end of scene, doesn’t it?”
It seems odd at first, but man, it’s nice for me as a player to have input after a hard move. And it’s nice for me as a GM to know the players are good with what’s happening after I check in.
As for physical presence to add flavor to NPCs, I don’t think that is impossible over Hangouts. It takes more familiarity with your camera angle and relationship to the camera. It’s doable, but different.
I always ask for feedback after the event and carry on dialogue via G+ until the next one to work out where people want the focus the next session. It’s definitely a different discipline though.
I always ask for feedback after the event and carry on dialogue via G+ until the next one to work out where people want the focus the next session. It’s definitely a different discipline though.
That’s not exactly what I’m saying, Eadwin Tomlinson. Checking in should happy during the event, between scenes. If you wait until the end of the session, that’s hours later.
That’s not exactly what I’m saying, Eadwin Tomlinson. Checking in should happy during the event, between scenes. If you wait until the end of the session, that’s hours later.
I do both is what I’m suggesting
I do both is what I’m suggesting
oh, I see, Eadwin Tomlinson. We are in accord, then! Excellent.
oh, I see, Eadwin Tomlinson. We are in accord, then! Excellent.