DB

I had the privilege of recently attending a wonderful convention focused on indie TTRPGs and enmeshed within the TTRPG industry space, Big Bad Con (BBC). It takes place roughly in the San Francisco area, and I had found people recommending it as a good convention to check out and play a lot of indie TTRPGs. So, I decided to leave from the rock and head towards the mainland for my first TTRPG convention outside of my home community.

It was quite enjoyable, and I have quite a bit I would like to say about BBC, so expect a few posts on my experience! Of those experiences, I would like to speak on a game that I played in that consisted of 2 GMs.

At BBC, people were running playtests of all sorts of games, and most of them had designed these games themselves! It was pretty exciting to share that passion for TTRPGs with other people, no matter what the game was.

The game that I playtested as a game that featured 2 GMs, both of who carried quite a bit of power in their roles. The game was called A Quiet and Lonely Hell, which explored themes of guilt and judgement of flawed characters between the 2 GM roles. There were aspects of the game that I liked, and aspects that I did not. There were super cool ideas with exploring liminal spaces, holding in emotions and thoughts, and building up to a point where your character would build up those feelings and emotions and finally need to vent to somebody.

Of the wonderful themes in that game, there was an aspect of the game that didn’t resonate with me. I had taken on one of the 2 GM roles in that game, and in my role, I was able to challenge a character’s actions and prevent them from making terrible choices.

As an improviser, this felt like I wasn’t honoring the choices of my fellow players, and it felt weird. I’m used to yes-anding, and cheering for my players and being open to what they’re presenting to the table–not changing their choices actively!

However, if I had looked through the game from the lens of a director, or a coach…I think that shifting a character’s choices could make for a lot of fun. But for my immediate instincts, it didn’t quite click for me.

Which is fine, right?

We play all sorts of TTRPGs, and each of us runs the games differently. Even a game of horror may have differing levels of levity to it. I don’t like to run a game that is always super heavy, because I believe that you need hope for horror to really sting right. You need levity, and comedy, otherwise you lose that aspect of humanity in the story.

Does that mean that’s wrong? Not necessarily. TTRPGs are games, and art! It’s all subjective, and we can all have different tastes for what we want from games.

No D&D game will look the same, and no other TTRPG will look the same from table to table as the group changes.

We can have different opinions, and that’s okay.

I had a similar experience at one of my local cons. I was at a panel where I was speaking with other GMs about running the game. I was the contrarian who had different beliefs about how a game should be run, and what you can do at a table. On that panel, we were butting heads and passionately speaking about each of our sides–but after the panel, we had a good amount of fun just talking about the games that we each enjoyed playing and running.

Would we enjoy gaming at the same table? Probably not. But, we share the hobby of TTRPGs. And, to support that hobby and to encourage others to enter it, we support each other.

We can agree to disagree.

We can all like different games.

And heck, your game should look and sound like how you want it to!