For a long time now, I've been rebelling against the current trend in role-playing game design theory to look at the act as a conflict of competing directions to take the game with dice as the arbitrary adjudicator. It all seems so 'you versus me'.

I'm learned the craft of gamemastering by playing in women's groups. You don't interrupt, you embellish; you don't contest, you compliment; dice don't decide; they enhance.

This is how I play and how I want to design. As the Game Design Heretic, I also have to subvert the typical tropes of gaming at the same time. This is why Scattershot seems so traditional with dice-offs and point-bases. Where I subvert is the use of experience dice to formulate the experience I want the players to have. (This is an idea I sorta stole from The Riddle of Steel and it's spiritual aspects.)

Now I'm a very big fan of Moyra Turkington and her thoughts on 'Pull' play. I've been sore attempting to recreate the essence of Scattershot around this idea. I can't do that without abandoning the subversion. However, I do see a place where it beautifully applies.

The Gamemaster

Gone is the role of referee; gone too the work of 'crafting the story'; a gamemaster will function on one level to smooth out pacing issues, keep everyone appropriately involved and keep an eye on dramatic tension. Where does pull come in? Instead of introducing elements of story, the gamemaster will 'Pull' players to create them themselves out of their expectations. As it happens, this is a terrific description of how I do it. (Remember "What Would Fang Do?")

I'll be developing this more in the future; just wanted to keep you in the loop!

Fang