There are two relationships between the Game Master and the Players: Cooperative and Adversarial. False dichotomy? No. Search your feelings, you know this to be true. But which one is the better fit for you and your players? Like all aspects of modern life, this will require deep introspection and open communication, an honest dialogue between friends. Or you could base your decision off of a short internet article.
Adversarial- The Game Master as Mastermind
In an adversarial relationship, the Players are looking for a GM that can plan challenges appropriate for their high-energy, goal-oriented play style, and adapt those challenges accordingly. Sounds like any GM/Player relationship, no? Well, there’s some flavor that needs elucidating.
I have a friend with a special set of dice. He calls them his “Party-wipe dice.” That is the mindset of the adversarial GM. They exult in creating challenges with intent of killing the PCs. In an adversarial relationship numbers and words become very important. How much rope do you have? What is the exact wording of that rule? How many worshippers does that cult (whose idol you just stole) have?
Do not judge this style of GMing too harshly. There is a type of player for whom this style is perfect. In the olden days they were called “munchkins,” and “min-maxers.” They would like to be called “optimizers.” We have settled on “powergamers.” These players scour sourcebooks and errata. They study dictionaries in preparation for arguing the semantics of the rules. They are not here to play; they are here to win.
Story is secondary in the Adversarial relationship. It serves as a backdrop, a framework to provide the justification for the challenges. It’s still important; one must feel invested in order for a victory to be satisfying. The story can also be a way to mine further challenges. Call an NPC by the wrong name or treat them like part of the scenery and suddenly you’re taking interaction penalties at best (and getting the Ned Stark treatment at worst).
You thought the police would just be okay with you killing the mob boss to save that young child? Ha, ha, Next Story arc: The Trial. Hope you have ranks in Law. Oh, that’s right, you took all those points in Contacts, so you have access to the greatest lawyer ever. Next Story arc: The Trial of the Century. For the remainder of the arc you will be surrounded by paparazzi, and any crimes you commit will hurt your chances. By the way, while the capo appreciates the sudden promotion, it’s time for retaliation. Nothing personal, roll for Initiative.
Powergamers will hate every second of this, until they start rolling dice and their frankly ludicrous number of bonuses ensure victory.
The end of an adversarial session leaves the GM and the Players shaking with excess adrenaline and hoarse voices from all the screaming (triumph or despair in statistically equal measure).
Ideal Game: Dungeons & Dragons
If there’s one thing an adversarial relationship loves, it’s enough supplements to crack a shelf. More than that, from the beginning, D&D has set itself up as adversarial. It’s focus is on dungeon crawling, traps, and combat. It named its Game Master the Dungeon Master, implying that, regardless of what the plot said, the GM was always the true Antagonist.
Cooperative- The Game Master as Moderator
In a cooperative relationship, the Players want a GM that says “Yes, and…,” or “Yes, but….”
Role-playing games are escapism combining all the best elements of improv-theater, Monopoly, and pigeon chess. Some players don’t want to get bogged down in rules; they want to rescue the prince by stealing the wall he’s shackled to. They want to kill the obviously evil vizier the very second she opens her obviously evil mouth. The GM ad-libbed some irrelevant detail about a nobody NPC that the Players found fascinating, so now they want to ditch the well-planned adventure and follow a person the GM’s notes labeled “Random Jerk,” (or “Ranje,” as is now their name).
A Cooperative GM thinks this is tubular, perhaps even radical. They love it when players come up with creative solutions to problems instead of using their stats as a battering ram.
This relationship is not without its difficulties. Tone is very hard to manage. A laissez-faire attitude about the rules means there needs to be a great amount of trust between Player and GM. Rules-lawyering kills the pacing and the creativity. The GM needs to be able to trust that the Players know what kind of game is being run, and the Players need to be able to trust that the GM is being consistent.
The end of a cooperative session leaves the GM and the Players having witnessed storytelling at its finest, with some of the best and longest lasting memories of any campaign.
Ideal Game: Hollow Earth Expedition
HEX is all about pulp-style action. The streamlined rules help to minimize checking and lawyering. The style point mechanic allows players to add props and set-pieces to a scene for their benefit. It epitomizes the spirit of “Yes, and….”
Remember when I said this wasn’t a false dichotomy? I lied. The Rule of the Excluded Middle does not apply here. The ideal group will find an appropriate ratio between these two options. Just remember that roleplaying games are supposed to be fun. If you’re not having fun with how your group plays, it might be time to try a new ratio.
Eric_Lauryn
Latest posts by Eric_Lauryn (see all)
- Ask a Gamer- With vs. Versus - October 2, 2015
