From the article archive
Expanding an Idea: Moving Past the Bad Ideas
After reading Bad Ideas by Mark I thought of some bad ideas I’d had in the past related to gaming (I’ve also had lots of bad ideas outside of gaming, but now’s not the time to discuss them). Some of my bad gaming ideas were actually based on good ideas, or at least ideas that had apparently work spectacularly well for other GMs. Fact is it’s tough to know if some things are bad until you try them out.
I had a really great idea for a D&D game a while back. I would run the players through the Return to the Tomb or Horrors campaign. The players had all told me they had never been through the original Tomb, much to my surprise, so I thought it would be a splendid way to bring some nostalgia to the group and let them all experience the classic they missed out on. The group thought it sounded like fun and so we started into it at the next session.
About half way through the Tomb I could tell they hated it. Prior to the adventure they told me they were willing to try a non-combat intensive adventure (which was one of the reasons I thought they would enjoy it), but I could see they weren’t into it. A good idea had now become a bad idea. The players weren’t having fun, and that would translate into me not having fun as well. Should I stick to the adventure and damn the no-fun torpedoes? Of course not! Time to change things up a bit.
I threw in a couple of extra monsters, re-designed some of the traps and re-worked a number of puzzles as well. It was still a challenge, but it was a challenge that the group would have fun playing. I saw the bad idea for what it was, and modified/adapted it into a good idea.
Everyone has a bad idea, the hard part as the GM is to move on once it shows itself. As GM you can discard, modify or change most situations on the fly so that the bad idea can be negated and the game can move on. However, this is only good for short term bad ideas. What about those big and nasty bad ideas? Like starting a whole new campaign only to find out that everyone hates it? These situations are rough, but I think I have a solution.
Two years ago a friend and I bought Sorcerer at GenCon. We read it over and we were both convinced that our game group would love it. I wanted a break from the Storyteller system and I was certain that this was the solution.
My friend and I talked Sorcerer up with the group and I did a mess of research to get set for the first session. That night we made characters, I explained rules and then we moved on to actual game play. Things were shaky, but I couldn’t tell if that was just “first night jitters” or an actual problem, so we pressed on to the next session.
Next game was very, very slow. No one was into it at all. Try as I might I couldn’t get things rolling. I could tell the players were trying, but their hearts weren’t into it. After a similar third session I went home and formulated a plan.
At the next session I announced to the group that things were not going well from my perspective. I asked what they thought. I encouraged them to be open and don’t worry as my feelings would not be hurt by their opinions. There was some reluctance at first, but then they opened up.
“I don’t like the way the system works very much.”
“I don’t think this game is letting you GM the way you want to.”
“I thought it would be fun at first but I just can’t get into it.”
“I’d rather play something else.”
I told the group that I had the following options for them:
1.We could push on for one more session and see if things improve and I could re-work the campaign to try and make it something that I knew the group would enjoy more.
2.We could take a vote on a number of other games we have and try them out.
3.I could let someone else GM for a while.
The group opted for number two and we ended up playing some Call of Cthulhu which everyone enjoyed.
So for me, my concern has shifted from trying to determine if something is a bad idea before I implement it in a game to learning how to identify them when I see them, and adapting them into good ideas. I’ve found that just about any bad idea can be salvaged if you act soon enough, but you need to be prepared to toss it out and start over if necessary.
That’s enough out of me for now. I’ll see you in the forums!
I had a really great idea for a D&D game a while back. I would run the players through the Return to the Tomb or Horrors campaign. The players had all told me they had never been through the original Tomb, much to my surprise, so I thought it would be a splendid way to bring some nostalgia to the group and let them all experience the classic they missed out on. The group thought it sounded like fun and so we started into it at the next session.
About half way through the Tomb I could tell they hated it. Prior to the adventure they told me they were willing to try a non-combat intensive adventure (which was one of the reasons I thought they would enjoy it), but I could see they weren’t into it. A good idea had now become a bad idea. The players weren’t having fun, and that would translate into me not having fun as well. Should I stick to the adventure and damn the no-fun torpedoes? Of course not! Time to change things up a bit.
I threw in a couple of extra monsters, re-designed some of the traps and re-worked a number of puzzles as well. It was still a challenge, but it was a challenge that the group would have fun playing. I saw the bad idea for what it was, and modified/adapted it into a good idea.
Everyone has a bad idea, the hard part as the GM is to move on once it shows itself. As GM you can discard, modify or change most situations on the fly so that the bad idea can be negated and the game can move on. However, this is only good for short term bad ideas. What about those big and nasty bad ideas? Like starting a whole new campaign only to find out that everyone hates it? These situations are rough, but I think I have a solution.
Two years ago a friend and I bought Sorcerer at GenCon. We read it over and we were both convinced that our game group would love it. I wanted a break from the Storyteller system and I was certain that this was the solution.
My friend and I talked Sorcerer up with the group and I did a mess of research to get set for the first session. That night we made characters, I explained rules and then we moved on to actual game play. Things were shaky, but I couldn’t tell if that was just “first night jitters” or an actual problem, so we pressed on to the next session.
Next game was very, very slow. No one was into it at all. Try as I might I couldn’t get things rolling. I could tell the players were trying, but their hearts weren’t into it. After a similar third session I went home and formulated a plan.
At the next session I announced to the group that things were not going well from my perspective. I asked what they thought. I encouraged them to be open and don’t worry as my feelings would not be hurt by their opinions. There was some reluctance at first, but then they opened up.
“I don’t like the way the system works very much.”
“I don’t think this game is letting you GM the way you want to.”
“I thought it would be fun at first but I just can’t get into it.”
“I’d rather play something else.”
I told the group that I had the following options for them:
1.We could push on for one more session and see if things improve and I could re-work the campaign to try and make it something that I knew the group would enjoy more.
2.We could take a vote on a number of other games we have and try them out.
3.I could let someone else GM for a while.
The group opted for number two and we ended up playing some Call of Cthulhu which everyone enjoyed.
So for me, my concern has shifted from trying to determine if something is a bad idea before I implement it in a game to learning how to identify them when I see them, and adapting them into good ideas. I’ve found that just about any bad idea can be salvaged if you act soon enough, but you need to be prepared to toss it out and start over if necessary.
That’s enough out of me for now. I’ll see you in the forums!
Recovered from the Gaming Outpost database backup. Original wording is preserved; damaged punctuation and presentation markup have been repaired. Historical links without a local match point to the Internet Archive.