No Combat in the Game. My players expected some, but I'm happy they were not let down when I got carried away with the role-playing. They gave me an ok rating. It is our first time play and we are still getting a feel for each other's style.
I didn't suffer my past uncertainties in the game, this time it was all about the fun. We enjoyed talking and exchanging ideas and we got to test them out in the game. I threw in all the impressions and voices I can do. I improvised some characters from the sick and sickeningly sweet corners of my mind and borrowed extensively from cliche's and popular stereotypes.
I tried to make it that every group of NPCs had a distinct voice and archetype the players can easily identify. There is a bit of a mystery to solve in the adventure Against the Cult of the Reptile God and part of the fun is being able to string the clues together on their own.
Modules are not sacred. I didn't pour precious time preparing them. They are tools and it is easy not to get overly attached and ditch canon/dogma for what works in the situation. In fact playing to the freedom, I can exaggerate and role-play to the HILT easily being free to blaspheme.
In the beginning of the adventure I've made this all clear to both my players. Babastosin ko to! (translated it is a way of saying I'm going to abuse this). Let all the ideas and word associations to "abuse" come to mind. Unlock the flood gates and tickle the player's "ick" threshold.
It was fun and funny. We intentionally let in all "broken" parts of the system when it comes to magic, and the supernatural but maintained the interaction and realism.
They both were elven F/M/T because I let them abuse the system. I find it the two: system and the relationship in the game very different. This transparency is something I learned in organizational cohesion, what is essentially a sense of fairness and what people expect from each other. I'm happy I got to apply that knowledge, the better to incorporate it in my skillset.
The dice was unmerciful to one of my players. I wanted to emphasize that it is them and not the dice that matters changes the rules but not the game. When pursuing general inquiry, a bad roll is not a dead end. Adapting is part of it, there are more senses and aspects of our perception, intuition and inference we can employ. Problem solving is trying a bunch of stuff till a successful strategy emerges. A failed deception reading roll or interpretation of a particular emotion or action is not the only ways to test for veracity, there are other "weaker" links or lower hanging fruits one can find in the situation. More if one is patient.
I guess, being open minded is another aspect that has changed with me. How really open minded I was changed when I've become more interested in how the players imagined all the events. Asking them to describe it as they see it in their minds eye helped create a stronger cohesion in ideas and develop an intuition where their thoughts are going.
I have two players and I'm very satisfied with the number. Although i do have a gregarious urg to share too much. I know I will really have a harder time with more. Simply from the is needed in carrying a good conversation. I guess quality attention can be described the same standards of the feeling really being listened to. (It is easier for me to listen to what people have to say when I can get sick of my own thoughts and move on to wonder how other people are thinking of the same things. )
Anyway another game next week. Hope our scheds can keep it up.