STARS IN MY POCKET LIKE GRAINS OF SAND
Stars in my pocket like grains of sand has been my first Warp Shell-campaign.
I have taken some time before writing this, because the situation that led to this point was unpleasant,
I have decided to cancel the campaign after a player and me got into a fight about their character’s healing ability.
The short version of it is, that I wanted to tie the healing ability to a roll, while the player felt like I wanted to decide something without consulting them first. Several following discussions later I have been accused of this and that and decided to not only ask the player to leave the group but also to cancel the campaign. I am a fairly new DM and have a lot to learn so this conflict was a bit overwhelming. Nevertheless, I have taken some time to reflect on this whole mess of a situation and have gained some knowledge that I want to share with you. Most of it is maybe obvious too y’all, but I thought I’d share it anyway.
1. Giving is easier than taking
It’s always easier to increase abilities of a player than nerfing abilities that are too powerful later on.
One part of the problem my player and me had, was in me wanting to change an ability and thereby nerfing it. Their character was able to heal for TOOL without making a check. After a few sessions and some really dangerous battles I felt that this healing ability was too powerful and took the suspense out of all battles. So I felt like tying it to a check made healing in the midst of battle more exciting. My player felt like I was taking something away that we previously had agreed on and refused my suggestions.
2. Years of Experience as an argument from authority
I am a very new DM. I have never DMed D&D, my first TTRPG was Call of Cthulhu, which I have GMed twice. My first game as a GM was The Dark Eye, which turned out to be complete disaster because I railroaded my players so hard, they decided to kill the quest giver and burn the town they were supposed to safe.
Since my Warp Shell-player has been playing TTRPGs for 20+ years and is very versed in LARP as well, they never tired of reminding me of this fact. They were the experienced one, I should just play by the rule of cool etc. Now, after having had several talks with the player and some thinking on my part, I know, that experience means very little, if it’s not coupled with the ability to take criticism, the willingness to always improve one’s own game and the acceptance of the fact that the games we play are collaborative, which sometimes means making compromises. If someone uses their experience to win an argument or belittle other inexperienced players or GMs, there’s something wrong.
3. Non-violent communication only works if all parties are doing it
Probably my biggest learning experience was to realise that a conflict can only be resolved, if both parties think of it as a conflict, are willing to compromise and communicate non-violently. Sounds too obvious, right?
The last discussion I had with my players was enormously unpleasant. I even told them that I felt very unpleasant. The problem was: my player didn’t think of the situation as a conflict or a miscommunication, but rather as something that I did wrong and needed to apologise for. So while I tried to be accomodating and use I-messages (“I feel, like we misunderstood each other and our conflict is a consequence of this misunderstanding.” etc.) the player went for telling me that they were disappointed in me, that they wanted an apology so they could forgive me and that “what I had done” (which they didn’t clarify) needed psychological counseling. Communicating like this made it clear to me, that there was no intent to resolve a conflict but rather to win an argument.
4. Life is short, games should be fun
Something that sounds like a truism when said out loud but I realised there’s a lot I had put up with just to play games with people I like. Apart from me GMing Warp Shell I also was a player in a D&D-group that I left shortly after. Part of it was me not wanting to play with the above mentioned player (who also was a player in that group) but another part of it was also that I realised that I didn’t have fun and that playing D&D felt like a chore. I feel that lots of players and GMs have similar feelings but don’t want to cause conflict, don’t want to break apart a game group and simply carry on (and get more and more miserable in the process).
5. There are different ways to play the games we love
One part of the conflict I had with my player was, that I realised that the way we wanted to play the game were not compatible. I wanted to play a game with high lethality, collaborative world building, lots of combat and giving every player the spotlight by switching between them.
My player felt constrained in their roleplay when I shifted the focus from one player to another, because it felt for them like I inhibited “free play.” Having one combat per session also felt too much for my player, because they wanted to have more time for roleplaying social interactions. Trying to change mechanics that concerned their character also felt like I was impinging on their character’s autonomy.
I am not writing this to say that my way of playing is way cooler and their way of playing is dumb. I am writing this, because I realised that there are different ways of playing that put the focus on different parts of the game and that sometimes those things cannot be compromised.
So, those are five of the many things I learned and although the whole situation has been highly unpleasant and extremely stressful, I feel that I as a person and as a GM have grown for the better (maybe that’s just me trying to find something positive about this clusterfuck, but I really think I’ve learned something). I hope some of these things are helpful or relatable in a positive way. I am taking a break from GMing now but will be back with a different group, in a different setting soon, I hope. Take care all!