XYZ - Examine Your Dungeon Management Style

Okay, "dungeon management style" doesn't start with a "Z". So sue me.

Way back when I was in college (sweet Odin, has it really been almost 10 years?), I had to take classes on management and small group communication. It was lots of stuff that didn't interest me at the time, but ever since I left school and started working a real job I recognize little snippets of those classes' materials every now and then. Lately, I realized some of it might apply to roleplaying games too!

Herding +3 Cats

You're about to play DM for your group. You've carefully worked out a plot and encounters to run and now there's 6-8 people sitting there who are going to do things you never expected to happen in your wildest dreams. One of them is consuming mass quantities of E.L. Fudge cookies. You fear for the well-being of the story and the campaign, to say nothing of your sanity. You have also probably devised means by which to cope with this.

In management theory, you can view the roles of the management and employees lots of different ways. I'm going to briefly go over three of them commonly discussed together, known as XYZ management theory. X,Y, and Z are all different styles.

• Theory X assumes that workers hate work and believes that you have to exert a lot of direct control over the workforce or they'll never get anything done. The boss calls the shots, the workers don't get a say, and if anyone doesn't do what he says they're subject to disciplinary action. Theory X managers are generally not well-liked.
  
• Theory Y is different in that it assumes workers are creative or inspired and would be happy to do work of their own accord if left to their own devices. Management shares decisions with the group, and feedback is generally welcome.
• Theory Z is sort of a hybrid of X and Y. While less participative than Y, it has a much higher regard for the needs of the employees than X. It also assumes that the workforce is happy to do their jobs provided the management is going to support them and look out of their needs.

So what does all this have to do with roleplaying games? While I don't think that XYZ management theory maps 1:1 with everything we do in roleplaying, I do think some important parallels can be drawn.

Dungeon Management Theory X

I'm assuming many of our readers have had to play a session with a DM who might take enforcing the social contract just a smidge too seriously. I've seen amazing feats of douchebaggery such as EXP penalties for a player being late to the session.

This is an example of X, albeit an extreme one. This DM wants things done his way or he will exercise his vast powers and authority and put offenders back in their place. He's authoritarian. (And an asshole, but that is another story.) I'm all about setting guidelines for the group, and if there's a problem you bring it up as a group. If you can't work it out, then maybe it's time for the offender to find a different group to play with. But petty disciplinary action? You're playing D&D to have fun. In my opinion, this does a hell of a lot more harm than good and I for one advocate talking through things like grownups. Grownups wearing elven chainmail.

There are much saner versions of X you'll see now and then. From an administrative standpoint, Theory X groups typically follow the DM's lead. He may have come up with the social contract, or still be using the one that was there when he joined. The degree to which this goes varies between groups, of course. I've seen groups let the DM have sole jurisdiction over everything from where/when they play, if new players can join, to whether he gets free pizza. I've seen a lot of perfectly functional groups work this way, and I've seen some flame out and die when everybody wasn't on board with the man in charge.

Interestingly, I've also seen Theory X groups play and switch DM's. Then it's the new guy's call on everything. (And I've seen a lot of scared looks around the table when the new guy does something way different than the old one.)

As far as actual gameplay goes, I've seen several DMs (myself included) attempt to put the session "on rails", where the players are still doing things but by and large what happens is in full control of the DM. Invisible walls are a tool I've seen used to do this, as are powerful creatures that the PCs can attack all day but never hurt - and the DM explains away everything. This is not to say that Theory X gameplay is necessarily bad, but having the players' destiny out of their own hands too long can lead to unrest.

Dungeon Management Theory Y

Administratively speaking, in a Theory Y group, most things are subject to vote by the group. Where you play, when you play, who's in, who's out, what's for dinner. The group establishes the social contract, and they can collectively change it whenever they feel like it.

In gameplay under a Theory Y campaign, the DM lays out places the party can go and things they can do, and the party decides where to go. They get nudges now and then, but for the most part it's the party's decision. Theory Y can lead to some seriously amazing adventures and it feels wonderful working as a group -- unless the group has no idea where the hell they are supposed to go and they are blind to Leopold the Dancing Plot Point who is doing the Riverdance right in front of them. Then they get frustrated. Too much of that, and you've got unrest among the ranks!

You can't win! OR CAN YOU?

Dungeon Management Theory Z

“If you tighten the string too much, it will snap. And if you leave it too slack, it won’t play.”
- Siddhartha, Epic Level Buddhist

Like its management theory counterpart, Theory Z is a hybrid between X and Y. The DM has a bit more weight in the decision making process than the rest of the group, but the group still makes the bigger decisions for itself. For instance, in our gaming group, the DMs sometimes make a call on where we should play so they can sequester in the basement and plan our demise. But other times, we play somewhere else in case someone can't get a babysitter.

Gameplay under Theory Z is, unsurprisingly, a mix between X and Y. The world may be wide open for exploration sometimes, but there's places to go and things to do that need to be accomplished, and the DM will nudge a bit harder to get them there.
Players in a Theory Z game might recognize the signs that this nudging is occurring, and metagame just a little to go with the flow. There's give and take, and the players know the DM is going to throw them a bone eventually in the name of fun.

But Which One Is My Group?

Good question! Your group may not map to one of these exactly, or it might handle things like Theory X administratively but play like a Theory Y. The point isn't to have a label to assign to your group and to your DM, it's to get you to step back and take a look at how you play. Knowing how you play and how you think might be more fun for everyone might make the difference for your group's roleplaying experience -- especially if some players aren't having a good time right now!

Well, now I don't feel quite so much like all those hours in class were such a waste of time. How does your group play? Are there any variations that your group does that I haven't described here? Throw us a comment, and let us know!

The Joys of Dungeon Mastering...

I have spent much time in the last few weeks reflecting on the things that I like to do and why I like to do them, all the way from career goals to recreational pursuits. That led me to consider my roleplaying hobby, specifically being the Dungeon Master, and why it is that I love it so much.

You are in control.

Human beings, by their very nature, like to be in control of the environment around them. Being the DM allows a level of complete control over the "surroundings" and activities that take place in those surroundings. Granted, there will always be someone that doesn't agree with your perspective on a given situation, but that's why 20d6 lightning bolts from the sky were created.

It is a creative outlet.

There are many jokes made about the alpha nerds, the ones that are so into their job, hobby, or passion that they demand some level of attention when they talk authoritatively about a given topic. The neat thing about DMing is that you simply need a story to tell and some people to tell it to and you're done. You can make that story be whatever you want, dictated however stringently, or modified and colored by the people you are storytelling to.

It is a creative outlet, plain and simple. Now there will be some alpha nerds that have all the techniques, toys, bells and whistles to make their story shine a little more than some, but at its root anyone can be good at it. Most of the DMs that I count as excellent had a good story, no miniatures, figures, fancy battle mats, maps or other accoutrements to aid their story. They simply told it well and knew when to flex it based on our input.

It's Social Networking for Nerds

Often, those that frequent are hobby tend to be people that would otherwise be described as weird... nerds, dorks, dweebs, melvins... the terms go on and on. Roleplaying provides a safe zone for those that fall into some or all of those categories. We get to hang out with others of our pack, trading stories, eating junk food and having fun. Usually, we are safe from the barbs and diatribes of the rest of society, and that provides the simple ability to unabashedly be ourselves and that is a very powerful thing.

Many of us even wear those previously listed labels as badges of honor, proudly heralding our love for things that most common folk will never be able to comprehend. It's all a matter of perspective.

You don't have to be you for awhile.

If you are one of the poor unenlightened members of our society that still get bothered by how we are perceived by others, then roleplaying offers you an escape from your normal job as a desk clerk, computer programmer, or copy writer and turns you into someone worthy of praise and adoration. You get to step into those heroic shoes that you would normally be too shy and awkward to don on your own in the real world.

There is nothing wrong with this, I happen to believe that one of the worst types of living is living without imagination. To be cast forever in the often disappointing real work and not able to get outside yourself for awhile and dream is a terrible notion for me, and that is one of the fundamental reasons why I love this hobby.

So let's hear yours, go nuts! I could go on in this thread for hours on my own!

Someone Set Gen Con Up The Bomb

In internets time this is old news, but some of you may have noticed that Gen Con filed for bankruptcy yesterday. For those of you who haven't read the article, the con is thankfully still on this August. Apparently, all this nastiness is a result of them being sued by Lucasfilm. You don't mess with George Lucas. Stormtroopers are really nothing but his gigantic legal team dressed in costume, except in real life they CAN hit the broad side of a barn. And I'm no stormtrooper, but last time I checked, Chapter 11 bankruptcy means sometimes the creditor winds up getting the assets of the debtor. That could mean a Lucas-owned Gen Con.

I really have to wonder what Gary Gygax thinks of all this stuff since the first Gen Con was held at his house. I somehow doubt he looked into a crystal ball and said "One day, this will be owned by Hasbro but then sold to a private individual who made a fortune off of cards with paintings and numbers them who was then sued by the people who will one day make a great space movie trilogy and then three seriously lackluster prequels". Perhaps I am wrong?

Times Change

I don't know if I'm the only one, but in recent years, I have noticed a change in the 'con -- and not necessarily for the better. I have noticed the sales floor shrinking rapidly. I noticed the Art Show suddenly occupying 1/3 of what used to be the sales floor two years ago. I saw less special guests brought by the convention itself and more from individual companies. Because, you know, Hayden Panettiere hawking a CCG about horses is what I drive to Indy for.

Up until a couple years ago, this really bothered me. Used to be, I came to Gen Con so I could basically do aggravated damage to my visa account. My first 'con was in 1997, and I beheld stuff with my own eyes that I had only seen in Dragon magazine before when I was a kid. The only place that sold D&D books around me was Waldenbooks, and they didn't have much. And I didn't have any money to buy anything back then, so this was like retail Christmas. The Chessex booth alone damn near killed me. Now, it's different. And I wonder whether it's the 'con or just times changing. These days, you can get pretty much anything your little heart desires on the Internet. And they've gotten rid of most of the really fun shops that sell stuff you can't find other places. (Apparently, you can find bootleg copies of old cartoons on the Internet. Who knew??!)

Why I'll Still Be Going

For me, though, there was a silver lining for all of this. Once the "main attractions" started to get worse for me and I started wondering if this yearly trek was worth it, I decided to go one last time and actually try some events. That got me into Nascrag and True Dungeon.

I could care less at this point if they can get big name actors to show up. I could care less if the sales floor is giant and tempting. It's close enough for me to get to easily, and it draws enough people that I can still have a lot of fun with new friends. And as long as that's still there, I'll be on the road every August. We are Gen Con. All of us. And as long as we keep going somewhere each year to have fun, none of this matters.

We're looking forward to this year in particular because this website has revealed to us a lot of new friends and readers we'd like to meet. I envision unparalleled levels of Completely Awesome.

Gen Con is one of my favorite events of the entire year, and I really wish the folks at Gen Con well. I hope they can weather all of this and keep on producing the event we've all come to know and love.

I Love My Wife Dearly, But She Is Really Strange Sometimes

I do have to mention, though, that when I told my wife Efreak (who is a professional graphic designer) about the whole bankruptcy thing, she got this evil gleam in her eye and said "does this mean you'll be going to Dragon*Con from now on?"

She's the only person I know who would have me travel another 800 miles just because she hates Gen Con Indy's checkered-flag logo.

Admittedly, it's about as "nerd" as having a deer's antlered head in some crosshairs and having the text appear in camouflage tones. Or maybe a mud-covered pickup truck. Or HHH and Mankind IN A PINK SLIP ON A POLE MATCH.

Characteristics of a Good Group

Yax over at Dungeon Mastering dot com recently posted about the most useful DM skills, and it got me thinking... what makes a good group of players? So here are some of my picks for characteristics of a good group.

1. Cooperative role play - there has to be a certain level of chemistry among members of the group that allows for a cooperative role play environment. Characters interact and contribute to each other's story.

2. Solidarity - the group has to be able to function as a group, not a bunch of individuals. If everyone is divided on what to do next, the plot will never advance and everyone will become frustrated.

3. Sense of Humor - the players (and their characters) should have sense of humor and have fun. Without fun, D&D wouldn't be worth playing.

What other characteristics define a good group?

Behind the Screen: Dealing with a misfire session...

Face it... as a DM, sometimes you're on and sometimes you aren't. Unfortunately, this weekend's session was one where I was not on.

What happened?

Several things were not aligning during this session for me... first off, I had planned a session to add a little depth to an overarching battle. It was more of a narrative night, which is not something I normally do. We had planned the general progression of events as we normally do, but we didn't solidify some key details prior to the session so it put me into a bit of a scramble working with my co-DM over chat to iron out those bits.

A few of our players in the group weren't feeling well that night (the flu is going around our area). They requested a shorter session, which limited some of our more crunchy plot elements from making an appearance that night.

In short, a lot of factors were aligning to result in a less than satisfying session.

Hindsight, engage!

Well, unless I start getting a degree in pharmacology I won't be able to help the illness issues much, but I should have seen that the players were more in the mood for battle, plot progression, or something that wasn't a narrative session. I could tell that not everyone detested the session, but it could have been a lot better.

The planning thing is what bothers me the most about the way this one unfolded. Usually I ask myself the five W's- who, what, when, where, why - before I'm satisfied that we've planned something adequately to launch. Then I do a few cycles of "how can they crash this" and after that something is usually deemed ready for launch. Apparently, this time I missed the "where" and failed to connect the whole scenario to the wants of my players.

Next time I'll be ready to go with something more satisfying for our group. One of the best things that can be done as a DM is to do the post-session autopsy to figure out what went wrong and how it can be prevented in the future. Thanks for joining me while I did just that!