Post originally by Jim Bob at 2005-02-02 16:00:28
Converted from Phorums BB System

Ralph wrote,

"I've run several dozen demos over the last 3 years.... I've NEVER witnessed the sort of dysfunction you assume would happen without a GM."

All I can say is, you've been lucky. I've tried to go with this sort of game several times, and it's been a dismal failure. Everyone pulls in different directions for a while. After an hour or two, a couple of the players give up and let the more aggressive, talkative players direct the game. Those one or two aggressive, talkative players leave the game session praising the game; the others leave it pissed off.

Ralph writes, "Far from that being the definition of a "perfect player" that seems to me to be the minimum requirement to be even worth spending time with a person."

That they be "intelligent, mature, imaginative, accomodating of one another's wishes, and equally committed to the game"? Yeah, nice theory, mate. Next you'll be telling me everyone at your workplace is skilled in every area required for their job, hardworking, and respectful of one another, taking pride in their work.

That's the ideal , certainly. But it's not the reality for most people. Many people's workplaces, and game groups, have less than perfect people in them. A few are really crap. We should avoid the crap, sure. But we can't avoid the imperfect ones.

Why would you spend time with people who aren't exactly what you want? Ask any of the millions of people a year who get divorced

People spend time with people who are imperfect. I think that a game system, to be useful, has to accomodate the imperfections of its players.

Raplh writes, "I can't imagine why anyone would want to spend many hours of their time with people who weren't mature, accomodating, and committed to everyone's enjoyment."

Like I said, ask the divorcees... this is a question about human nature. The answers are many and various, but essentially boil down to, "because they can't do any better," or, "because they think they can't do any better."

People aren't perfect. People are at least sometimes stupid, sometimes immature, sometimes stubborn and unco-operative, and sometimes do their best to screw others up.

And sometimes, too, they're intelligent, mature, accomodating, and want to contribute to everyone's fun - but they STILL want to take the story in different directions.

Remember your analogy of people telling stories around the campfire? I say again - in that case, one persons tells the story. They don't tell the story co-operatively. So it's a bad analogy, either for Universalis, or for regular roleplaying.

I don't say that Universalis and similar games never work. I say that they sort of players they need to work - those players are a very tiny minority of all players, and they don't need a game system at all. What Universalis can contribute for them is to help them realise they don't ever need to buy an rpg book again. When they are so smart, mature, accomodating and giving - they don't need to buy any books for it.