First to give some reference to the pricing poll yesterday, the question was 'how much would you pay for a professionally printed version of Cthentacle'. To which the answer seems to be that you'd pay around £10-12 or $14-18 in monopoly money.

For your money that would get you:

• 64 plastic-coated cards
• A 4-page rules booklet.
• A clear plastic presentation case.

The quote I got covered all that, plus shipping to me at a per unit price of around $14. Now, ideally I'd want to mark that up by about 50% to cover the time, effort, cover costs in case I didn't sell them all etc, so that, ideally, should be around $21, or £14. Doesn't look like that'll do if I want to sell any, so I need to look at ways of cutting costs.

I could: 

• Ditch the booklet, knocking down the per-unit cost by $2, leaving the rules on rules cards with a weblink to a downloadable booklet of extra rules.
• Ditch the plastic box and go with a plain white tuck box, but I can't get art on it unless I order 500 units - fat chance. This would save around 20 cents per unit.
• Not bother with the plastic coating - M:TG never bothered, I could up the cardstock GSM to compensate a little, but I don't know how much this would save.

Opinions sought!
Getting any card game printed POD is a major league effort, if it's a pornographic card game you're going to find things even more difficult. Getting Hentacle and now Cthentacle printed has been a big, long, pain in the arse, fraught with issues.

The first time I got any printed I went to my local printer in Andover. This was, needless to say, traumatic. People know me on sight around Andover and surrounds, even if they don't know me personally and the print shop was right near the centre of town and staffed entirely by women. Nevertheless I got the job done by them, though their card quality wasn't that great, very bendy indeed and very pricey. The worst part was being informed that the cards had been guillotined by a lovely little old lady who was almost due for retirement, considering what the cards depict that was severely blush inducing, as was the moment when the rather lovely young lady in the shop started opening the boxes when I went to pick them up, offering to check that they were OK.

Heart stopping.

The local printer wasn't any good for long term printing, the quality wasn't that high and the costs were way too high so I was forced to look elsewhere.

Oh boy, is the printing world full of scam artists. There's a lot of companies in India or China that are professional and handle a lot of card printing for 'The Big Boys' but if you're not printing at least 1,000+ units you can forget it and they often have extremely exacting printing specifications and if you don't/can't meet them, you're boned.

The smaller scale businesses are either run as close knit family firms 'Print porn? Are you out of your sick little mind?' who kindly send you Christian tracts by e-mail after you explain what you want printed or are run by people who are a 'little bit dodgy' in the same way that a rat is a little bit covered in fur*, naming no names that rhyme with 'Ben Shit-Pan'. No fewer than three POD companies I approached and were willing to take on the job went bust practically overnight and it got to the point where I wondered if I had the kiss of death.

Fortunately a friend came to the rescue and it wasn't a printing source I'd ever really considered before, due to the assumed cost and quality issues. I mean, who would think of using FedexKinkos to get their porno card game printed? The quality was as good as I could hope for - outside full on professional printing - and with the dollar as shafted as it was at the time it was cheap as chips. Unfortunately that shop recently 'upgraded' its printers and now can't do accurate duplex or cutting any more. So I'm tossed back out on the street.

There's a distinct feeling of deja vu all over again, going back to the local printer they've now been taken over and have a company policy of 'not doing adult material' with an implied comment of 'you worthless scum, never darken my doorstep again' and the other local printers haven't even deigned to send me a reply. A chinese printer sent me something incomprehensible but which did say they only really took runs of 500 minimum, so that was out.

In between all that I've had offers from three different companies down the years to take Hentacle at least professional, one had it optioned for a year and did nothing, another offered money then dried up and disappeared and the last is still in negotiation but has to be very careful because of their licensed properties, leaving all that in limbo.

The company I'm currently talking to is expensive (see above) but has great - and communicative - customer service. Unlike others who - in mid negotiations before have suddenly stopped communicating. Others have not replied, given abuse or sounded eager and then not gotten back to me again. Here's hoping I've finally found somewhere I can get a deal together and get a new game out there!

Next time I'll save myself some bother and do a game about good, wholesome, honest violence!

*I'm re-reading Neverwhere, you'll forgive the literary indulgence.

As with Games Masters there are as many different types of players as there are players. No two people quite want exactly the same thing in the same way no two people like exactly the same books, TV shows or films. You can identify trends in player desires and play styles though and that can be a very helpful thing in crafting a game to suit the group and individual play to suit the individual players.

The Action Hero
The Action Hero wants to do impossible deeds, swing from chandeliers, fight off ten men at once and get away with the damsel in distress. They tend to like games that encourage or include this sort of over-the-top action and may run aground in games that are more gritty and realistic, trying to do things that - in the real world - lead to a quick and messy death. Games Masters may need to loosen up the game and be a bit more generous with Action Hero players but Action Hero players themselves need to be aware that not every game is Zu Warriors of the Magic Mountain.

The Anthropologist
The Anthropologist finds social interaction to be the key to their enjoyment. As well as socialising Out of Character with the group they like to talk up a storm and understand the situation with the Non-Player-Characters in game. This can be a headache for the Games Master who has to keep dozens of NPCs and their motivations clear in their head at all times. The Anthropologist's concern with social interaction can bore other players who like to hit things more. The Games Master should include social scenes where they can shine and get their jollies, but equally the Anthropologist should be gracious and acknowledge that not everyone likes to play out two hour long speeches.

The Expert
The Expert likes their character to be really, really, really good at something. Perhaps they're a sniper or a hyper-specialised magician, perhaps they're a scholar of ancient Egypt, perhaps a computer hacker. Whatever it is the player likes to be an unparalleled genius in that one specific field. Unfortunately in scenes or encounters where that expertise doesn't apply they're probably about as much use as a chocolate fireman. The GM needs to make sure that in every game there's somewhere that The Expert can be useful and that their pre-eminent status doesn't get undermined too much. The player of The Expert needs to realise that there's other people in the game and other topics and ways of going about things, developing some secondary capabilities is probably a good idea.

The Investigator
The Investigator lives to solve the mysteries of the game. They love uncovering layer after layer of plots and schemes until they get to that sublime 'AHA!' moment where everything falls into place. Investigators are good from a Games Master point of view since they can drive the plot forward but there can be a temptation to create overly convoluted plots to appeal to The Investigator which can leave less motivated players behind. The Games Master needs to introduce puzzles at appropriate levels for different players and The Investigator needs to remember to let other players have their moment in the sun.

The 'Me but not Me'
The 'Me but not Me' doesn't quite grasp the idea of playing a character other than themselves, or can't, or prefers to consider how they would act in such a circumstance. The Games Master needs to be careful not to push too many of the player's personal buttons, though some of them can be good to put into the game to increase engagement. The 'Me but not Me' player needs to remember that the other people at the table may not be playing themselves, at all.

The Snowflake
The Snowflake likes to be something special and unique. Maybe they want to be a lost prince or princess, maybe they want to play a race that's normally limited to monsters. Perhaps they want some unique powers. This can, frankly, be a pain in the arse for the Games Master who shouldn't feel that they have to go along with any and all whims of the players. Snowflakes can be good for a game though, excellent for plot hooks and providing something of a focus for the rest of the group. The Games Master should find a way to fit some uniqueness - for all the players - into their games while the Snowflake should try to understand that they make a lot of extra work and perhaps settle for something rare, rather than absolutely unique.

The Thespian
The Thespian craves suspension of disbelief. They want to live the life of their character and work their way entirely into their head. They want to think and act as them and live in their shoes, even for a couple of hours. The Thespian can have trouble compromising their role-play for the good of the group and the game as a whole. As a Games Master it's flattering and enthusing to have someone so into the game but, on the downside, they can resent the out-of-game chatter and socialising that goes on. The Games Master needs to give The Thespian a little more attention and RP opportunity. The Thespian needs to understand that not all the players are like them and some people just like to eat pizza, kill things and take their stuff and take their enjoyment where they can.

The Winner
The Winner likes to conquer, to defeat, to win. They may view the game in an adversarial mode of thought and may even compare themselves to the other players. They're driven to be the best and while this is often a hindrance it can be a boon as they can often take the lead of the player group and play ruthlessly to best the antagonists. Games Masters need to watch Winners as they're more likely to cheat and also needs to up the ante for the difficulty of scenes and encounters to account for how driven they are. Winners need to take a step back, calm down, remember that it's only a game and give the other players more input.

What's a player in an RPG? This seems like a pointless question to ask but I think it is worth exploring. What are you when you're a player in a role-playing game? Are you an actor playing a role? Are you yourself - or some part of yourself - thrown into these situations? Are you like a chess player, only with a single piece, are you the controller of something 'other'? Why are you playing? How do you play? What are you playing for?

Different players have different motivations for playing, some people like to step into the shoes of someone unlike themselves, some people like to win against overwhelming odds, some love tweaking statistics or creating 'optimal builds', some play the system, some play the game, some play make believe.

The only thing all players really have in common that they're participants in the game. In an ideal world all the players have similar playing ideals and goals that compliment each other and the Games Master, but the world is rarely perfect and diversity can have a beauty all of its own. Players are all there at the sufferance of the Games Master and each other though and an awareness of that, of some basis of social etiquette and that - like the GM - each player is there to facilitate each other's fun, and the Games Masters. This is something that I feel's being lost, particularly in the CRPGs and MMORPGs where singular play and internet anonymity makes a lot of players very selfish and focussed entirely on their own fun, that attitude can - unfortunately - carry over into TTRPGs.

Tabletop RPGs are a filthy, commie, pinko, liberal pasttime. They require an awareness of other people, of 'society' to work really well together and the players, as the game's 'proletariat' are essential to the Glorious People's Republic of Gaming! Long live the revolution!

It feels to me as though the role of the Games Master in gaming has been lessening for some years and in two directions. On the one hand there are some games - such as D&D4 - that are so codified and clear-cut in their rulings and systems that the Games Master might as well be a games console, running along a set little track nice and efficiently. On the other hand, the reaction to these kinds of systems has been the 'soft', narrative type games where player input plays a much more significant role in the game - directly rather than through play - than it used to. Case in point being the character/team creation rules in Spirit of the Century.

In some ways this is good, the more set and codified games are easier to prepare for, they're 'plug and play' in a way. You can just slot in a gang of goblins, treasure option B2 and some environmental hazards and you have an 'encounter'. With the softer games the shared burden of coming up with plot hooks and character buy-in relieves the Games Master of a great deal of the weighty burden of coming up with something everyone wants to play and finding reasons for the group to be together. In other ways it's bad, the GM becomes less of an interpreter and gets to put less of a personal spin on what's going on, or they succumb to being a wish fulfilment engine with less of their own narrative engagement with the game and the story.

Of course, you can always ignore both and do your own thing, damn the torpedoes, but it's nice when a game works with you rather than against you, where the system, setting and theme harmonises with the way you want to play. Speaking for myself I'm caught in the middle of the whole ideological 'gaming battle'. My happy place is somewhere between the two extremes.

There are as many different kinds of Games Master as there are people willing to run games for people but they can, nonetheless, be streamed into a number of different types, depending where their focus on the game rests. If you're a player it helps to know what sort of Games Master you have so you can have realistic expectations of the game. If you're a Games Master identifying what sort of GM you are can help you identify your strengths and weaknesses and play to them or overcome them. Here's a few of the more recognisable ones:

Auteur
"The artist doesn't have time to listen to the critics. The ones who want to be writers read the reviews, the ones who want to write don't have the time to read reviews." - William Faulkner

The Auteur has an idea and you're privileged enough to be along for the ride. The Auteur isn't a railroading Games Master in the traditional sense but, rather they have a story to tell and if your irritating player actions get in the way, then they'll get ridden roughshod over. If they add to their idea then that's different, they might get incorporated and run with. The Auteur wants everything to be perfect, to shine light on their idea and for the game to be one of the best ever. If you all get on then this may, indeed, happen. If the player's tastes and ideas differ from those of the GM then you may be in trouble.

Advantages: The Auteur tends to put a lot of work and thought into their games and they're often great, so long as you don't go against the flow too much. The Auteur is unlikely to run out of interest in their own project and so you're pretty much guaranteed the game will run on through to its conclusion.
Disadvantages: The Auteur wants to do everything and they may include playing the player's characters, or at least interfering with them to the extent that they're unrecognisable to the player's original intent. You're also very unlikely to get a lot of leeway in playing the game and while not on rails per se, you're at best on a fairly narrow path.

Autocrat
"Dictatorship is without a doubt the most satisfying form of government...as long as I'm the dictator." - Phil Stromer

The Autocrat desires total and absolute control over the game and will brook no argument, no rules-lawyering and no complaints. They'll probably be quick to chuck people out of the group for being 'disruptive' and arguing their calls and they get off on being 'in charge'. They may even see the Games Master's role as being adversarial in a decidedly old-skool fashion.

Advantages: The Autocrat's game will tend to be organised and efficient, you'll get a lot of gaming done, albeit on their terms. They know how to keep order at the gaming table and to prevent others from spoiling the game.
Disadvantages: You can never quite be sure whether what you do while playing is going to offend and goofing off, half the fun in a lot of games, is less likely to be tolerated.

Captain Play-Doh
"Too little liberty brings stagnation and too much brings chaos." - Bertrand Russell

Captain Play-Doh is whatever you want him to be. You want to play a tense Lovecraftian horror using Bunnies & Burrows? You go it. You want to play a sentient otter with Jedi mind powers in D&D? No problem. Captain Play-Doh is an amorphous mass shaped almost entirely by the desires of the players which can often lead to games that are such an incoherent mess that anyone new joining the group wouldn't have the barest hint of a clue as to what the hell was going on.

Advantages: Whatever you want to play they're up for. Provided your gaming group isn't too wild and crazy (in different ways) this can help ensure everyone has fun and a GM with some flexibility is good for helping everyone get on and get their kicks from the game.
Disadvantages: If your group isn't coherent or of similar taste then you're going to end up with a growling Frankenstein's Monster of a game. Without a backbone Captain Play-Doh is unlikely to stick up for the things that they find fun or to be able to apply some necessary discipline to the game.

Enthusiast
"If you aren't fired with enthusiasm, you will be fired with enthusiasm." -  Vince Lombardi

The Enthusiast is dead keen on something. Perhaps it's Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5 or The Lord of the Rings but it could be something much more obscure, like bats*. Whatever it is they're devoted to it, enthusiastic about it and are a die hard fan. While they know everything about it and can produce games and adventures of startlingly complex subtlety and depth on this subject, outside of it, not so much.

Advantages: Within the paradigm of what they know you won't find a better GM. Even better, everything they do will fit within that universe and no matter how obscure you go, they should know what you're talking about. This is even better if their enthusiasm is for a particular game that you all like to play.
Disadvantages: Outside of their favourite subject the Enthusiast isn't so enthusiastic and their performance will be lacklustre or, even worse, they'll start introducing things from what they do know into games that they don't like so much. AT-ATs as dungeons for example, or even worse.

Homebrew
"He who builds a better mousetrap these days runs into material shortages, patent-infringement suits, work stoppages, collusive bidding, discount discrimination - and taxes." - H. E. Martz

The Homebrew GM never does anything by the book. They build their own games either from scratch or by cannibalising the bits they like from other games and roughly nailing these pieces together and calling them a game, but a game that only they really understand. The Homebrew is a bit different to the professional games designer, who may be looking for playtesting. The Homebrew GM isn't interested in creating a working, professional product so long as their Rowland Emett-like game system does what they want it to do.

Advantages: You'll end up with a system and a game perfectly suited to your GM and the kind of games they like to play as well as their game world. At least they'll think it's perfect and that counts for a lot.
Disadvantages: You're unlikely to understand the system, so they could be just making things up for all you know. Whatever system there is, is likely to change from session to session, constantly pulling the ground from beneath your feet.

The Long Haul
"As you journey through life take a minute every now and then to give a thought for the other fellow. He could be plotting something." - Hagar the Horrible

The Long Haul Games Master is in their element with epic, long-term campaigns rather than individual adventures. They crave the extended story, the slow build up, the reveal and the intricacies and attachment that come with longer games. This long term view covers almost everything they do, meaning that individual adventures can cover... not very much ground.

Advantages: If you have the time and energy to invest in a long term campaign then these are the perfect Games Masters to have. They appreciate character development and if the games are slow to get going, the eventual payoff is worth it.
Disadvantages: If it's a one-off game you're after the Long Haul can be worse than useless as by the time the game gets anywhere you have to wind up the session, so you end up with a ton of different campaign starts that never go anywhere.

The Mayfly
"There are three side effects of acid. Enchanced long term memory, decreased short term memory, and I forget the third." - Timothy Leary

The Mayfly is the opposite of the Long Haul. The Mayfly is a firecracker chain of ideas and enthusiasms but none of them ever, really, seem to amount of much. The constant flow of ideas and distractions pulls them in all directions and makes them a fount of novelty but none of it ever really seems to stick.

Advantages: If you're after a one-off game the Mayfly is your man. Their scattershot of ideas is bound to get a few good hits and if you're really lucky you have another GM in your group who can take some of these good ideas and run with them.
Disadvantages: Even if you start a campaign the Mayfly is likely to lose interest and either change the game you're playing in some way or to want to change to an entirely different game.
Disadvantages:

Referee
"A judge is a law student who marks his own examination papers." - H. L. Mencken

The Referee sees the position of the Games Master as like being 'the guy who knows the rules' in a boardgame. They're there to officiate, to see that the rules are applied fairly and evenly and that the scenario is followed. While they're fair they're also likely to be fairly uncreative - at least where the rules are involved. A style of GMing that has largely fallen out of favour.

Advantages: You're going to be able to get a fair showing in the Referee's games but since most GMs bias in favour of the players, that may feel like they're picking on you rather than being fair. The Referee is going to know the rules though and you're unlikely to have huge pauses in the game while someone looks up a rule in the book.
Disadvantages: Referees tend to be the people who buy modules, so you may well find yourself stuck on rails when it comes to actually playing through an adventure. You're also unlikely to get away with any creative rules bending, even if it makes perfect, logical sense.

*Srsly, I felt really sorry for the guy but it was a non-starter.

The idea of giving the players more direct influence over the course that a game takes has gained a certain amount of cachet in recent years, though it's not exactly a new phenomenon (many Games Masters seek player input into their games, game worlds and adventure settings and topics) it has become more and more mechanically formalised, which is a little contradictory as it's more associated with the story-strong games than the system-strong games. This ranges from special points (Fate/Action etc) that let you interrupt the flow of the game to get re-rolls, trigger special powers or force a redaction of a scene to the more explicit worksheets, merits and flaws that can dictate the way the game will go or provide fodder for a Games Master to create a campaign from.

This isn't all a bad thing, if you're the sort of Games Master who can roll with the punches this sort of stuff can be a real boon, providing constant feedback and direction to the game, making it more of a negotiation between the Games Master and the players and helping everyone get something they like and want from the game. If you're trying to guide characters through a particular story that you like and that you've worked hard on though, you can end up completely sabotaged.

The real problem lies with the fact that players can now interfere with something that was relatively sacrosanct, the plot. Previously Rules Lawyers could argue the toss over the application of the rules and that was bad enough, Rules Lawyers can be a real bane to successful campaigns, now players can also interfere with the plot and the story - in some systems - something that the Games Master could previously cleave to their bosom as relatively inviolate.

Grim's Rules
4. Whatever the game, the guy running it is ultimately the one in charge.
5. Work with your Games Master, not against them - and vice versa.
6. Whatever the game, you don't need to apply all the rules, as written, or at all.

Well, I just re-read through Neverwhere 2nd Edition to see what I had and where I need to go and I've laid out the skeleton of the new book. Basically that's what I do with any project, I start by outlining the chapters, sections, headings and subheadings that I predict are going to be there and create a skeleton upon which to hang the rest of the writing. Then, when I'm actually writing the piece, I go back and I fill in the gaps with material, bit by bit. It helps break up an otherwise daunting task into a lot of smaller, more managable jobs.

Frankly though, I'm in awe of myself seven years ago, the 2nd Edition of Neverwhere is bursting with creativity and, while it's rough around the edges and not necessarily clear enough in some places that creativity shines through. Kudos younger me, kudos! What definitely does need attention however, is the system.

Currently in the second edition a character is made up of a description of five adjectives and three skill levels, when you approach a task you tap into appropriate adjectives, apply a skill if appropriate, roll a d10 and add it on comparing against a difficulty/enemy to see if you win. That's pretty much the complete extent of it.

I want to change this a little and here's some of the rules changes I think I'll make.

• Characters are still defined by five adjectives and three skill levels but I'm going to account for adverbs and change the description of the skill levels. Adverbs describe multiples or strong traits, eg: 'Very strong' for two and something else like 'extremely' for three. Skills will come in Novice, Professional and Master capabilities and will be quite broad, more like professions I think.
• The dice will change to a d6 - being more accessible and 6s and 1s will 'implode' or 'explode'. If you roll a '1' you take that away from your total and roll again, continuing to roll and take away if you continue to get 1s. Sixes will go the other way, adding 6 each time (or possibly only adding one). This allows for consistency in characters that are really good at things, occasional nasty botches and also wild, luck-fuelled success.
• There'll be victory consequences and however much you beat a difficulty by lets you buy consequences. EG you might negate someone's traits by injuring or humiliating them, or give them new negative traits that can count against them.
• Characters will be able to take negative or 'mixed' traits at character creation.
• Static challenges will also be governed by words. EG: A wall might be 'Slippery' and 'smooth' and 'very tall'.

Let me know what you think.

The Games Master might be the adjudicator but they're still, also, a player in their own right and deserve to have a little fun. Believe it or not, from the Games Master side of the table it can seem like the players get all the fun, getting to play their characters in depth and engage in the storylines, to feel the thrill of victory and the bitter taste of defeat. Being the Games Master can seem a bit too much like being an accountant in a large firm, underappreciated but essential, wrestling with dry figures and statistics while everyone else is having high powered board meetings in exotic locations. From the player's side it might look like the Games Master has all the power but it often doesn't feel like it.

It's often overlooked that the Games Master is another player who deserves enjoyment from the game as well, sure, some Games Masters are just awful but still here's a person who has taken the time to come up with an adventure idea and who has been kind enough to offer to run it for you. Their ideas and their game, however hackneyed and/or cheesy, deserve a little bit of respect because without them you wouldn't be playing at all. So, show some appreciation for your Games Master, even if they're not the best one in the world because they're still going to be offering you something you'll have a hard time getting without them.

Sometimes the Games Master can take the idea of being a player in their own game a bit too far of course. This is where the horrifying case of the Games Master Player Character (GMPC) comes in, or even the favoured NPC. Sometimes a Games Master wants to get the joy of playing as well as GMing, but both at the same time. This is when either their character joins the party and they play them out as well as Games Mastering or when a particular NPC that they really like, a LOT, is suddenly all over every plot and scene in the game. Games Masters are only human, they want their character or their favourite NPC to be super competent and effective and suddenly the players can feel sidelined, accomplices to the Super-Character. The best way to avoid the problem is simply not to have Games Master characters in the game at all, ever, period, make it a rule. If your Games Master is being a prick with a super-powerful NPC and disenfranchising the player group, tell them, fix it, don't suffer and bitch in silence.

Grim's Rules
1. Know and understand where your games are coming from, your gaming history and that of your group.
2. Don't GMPC, ever.
3. If someone in your group is being a dick. Tell them, but gently if possible.

Here we are then...

The push got a grand total of 176 new followers spread across Twitter, Myspace, Facebook and Livejournal which is pretty healthy going I reckon! I'm now committed to producing a new edition of Neverwhere and commissioning some additional art (Raven, I'll be in touch soonish about that when I have a more definite plan for the book).

I'd like to keep this communication and rapport going between the people who've decided to follow me and who want to see the new edition come about. I want your suggestions - not that I'll necessarily use them - things you'd like to see, features of London that you think I missed, streets and stations that would make good features of London Below, maybe ideas from your own games that worked well. I've already slightly altered the title (see above) based on the negative feedback from the previous post, but try and make any comments a little more helpful and directing, eh? 'It sucks' doesn't much help me out.

The first thing I need to do, as I discussed, is to re-read and re-watch Neverwhere in its various original forms, book, TV Series and Graphic Novel as well as re-reading the old version of the game (something I've already done, wincing at the terrible presentation, something that will improve greatly I assure you.

I'll keep you all updated here on a regular basis, but I can't guarantee that being a daily occurance as it looks like I'm still going to have a lot of freelancing on my plate and I'll have to squeeze Neverwhere in around that.

Some initial thoughts I have are:

• Working The London Eye, The Millenium Dome and The Gherkin in, as well as any other developments in London that have come about since 1996 (ye gods I'm old) when the TV series first came along. This would include parts of the Jubilee Line Extension and the extensions of the Docklands Light Railway.
• Adding in some adventure seeds and expanding many of the A-Z entries.
• The system will remain largely the same, maybe a bit more finesse for the multiples/skill levels and better knack definitions. The major difference will be in (optional!) more codified consequences and working out negative adjectives and their implication. Basically I'm thinking that when you win a challenge you can dictate certain levels of outcome depending how much you beat the target by.

First things first though, reading! In depth reading at that!

The Games Master is the essential crux of just about any conventional role-playing game. Even the new-wave, touchy-feely, GMless games aren't actually GMless, they just require everyone to be the GM all at once. The role of the Games Master - or the expected role at any rate - has changed over the years from the all-powerful gaming demigod and despot of the old days to a more nuanced and cooperative, less oppositional role in more modern role-playing games.

You can describe the role of the Games Master in many ways but none of them are quite accurate and the real thing is a combination of these factors in various different proportions:

• The narrator of a story.
• The referee of the game.
• The banker in monopoly.
• Official interpreter and applier of the rules.

Individually none of these are particularly true but taken as a collective whole they do - somewhat - describe the role of the Games Master. Perhaps the best way to think of the Games Master is to describe them as a 'Facilitator' which, while sounding like corporate weasel-speak is probably the closest to the truth. The Games Master's role, more than anything else, is to try and make sure that everyone at the table - including themselves - has fun. They do this by coming up with good and engaging plots, engaging NPCs and giving the players a good level of challenge for their characters without things being either a complete pushover or a slaughterfest where everyone dies for no good reason.

I think this is the most up-to-date and most effective basis from which to approach being the Games Master of a game, the old-skool adversarial approach where you were actively out to 'get' the players doesn't really wash these days outside of board games such as Descent and the auteur style 'Storyteller' reduces the players to bit part roles in the Games Master's story, which - however good the story might be - isn't what an interactive game should be about.

To that end, I'll try and identify problems in Games Mastering and gaming from this perspective, where the Games Master's role is to provide the commodity of fun to both themselves and their play groups over all other concerns from fairness to proper application of the rules.

Where is there to go from here? Where next? The internet continues to increase in importance for gaming to the point where World of Warcraft - derived from D&D and Warhammer - has all but completely replaced D&D in the public consciousness. Gaming is different, more widespread and more scattered, but there's still things that the new gaming can learn from the old in terms of player participation, storyline, roleplaying, plot and characters.

A good, effective way to play traditional RPGs over the internet is needed, the current options being unwieldy, over technical or vapourware. The existing online games need an injection of the 'traditional values' of old-skool roleplaying games and some old-skool roleplaying games need to be made to try and cater to the new, online situations. Games that can be played over IRC or voice chat without getting bogged down or that make the nature of forums and chatrooms a boon rather than a hindrance.

For me my gaming and my work is pushing more and more in the direction of online, PDF publishing, forums, social media, MMORPGs, Wiki, chatrooms... the internet provides a perfect medium for updated, traditional RPG gaming if it can be properly harnessed and that's what I'm seeking to try and accomplish, as a writer, as a designer, as a player and as a Games Master.

0. Preparation
It's obvious that I've hit the sufficient number of adds and followers that I wanted in order to meet the trigger to develop Neverwhere 3rd Edition, so between contracted work, that'll be the thing I work on next. In preparation for that I intend to a) Re-read the book, b) Re-watch the series, c) Read the graphic novel version. I'll also re-read the 2nd Edition of the game, it having been some years since we put it together.

1. Primarily for Laptop/Screen
Any form of print is going to result in direct profit for someone. So that's right out. The game can only be developed for home-printing and for giving away electronically. This means it's only going to be 72dpi - at least the elements that aren't scalable - and optimised for landscape at proportions approximate to US Letter, so it could still be printed. It'll be PDFed and, depending on time, interlinked/hotlinked between pages - may as well do that if it's primarily going to be electronic access.

2. Expanded rules - but not TOO expanded.
We were ahead of the game by quote a few years when we wrote Neverwhere with systems like PDQ, FATE and HeroQuest now using these narrative, descriptive, non-statistical terms for character definition. Neverwhere has a certain purity to it though and it's easy for non-gamers to get the idea of just describing characters. There's a purity and simplicity here that I want to preserve, without all the complications and add ons that - to one degree or another - swallow up the advantage of the simplicity in these other systems. Neverwhere does need some more (optional!) hard and fast rules though for governing things like combat, consequences and so on.

3. Rewrite/Rework/Remodel
Neverwhere 2nd Edition is basically sound as a book, it just needs a lot better presentation and a good going over to make sure of everything. A reorganisation, a bit of updating, a few additions and an improved system.

4. Unified Art
All art will be done by Raven Morrison for this edition to give it a unified look and feel. I'll be working on the layout etc to try and give it a 'found object' fanzine/manuscript look, in keeping with the background and idea of the book.

I started early with online gaming, not just serial-connecting together a couple of Atari ST computers in different rooms - that barely counts - but using a creakingly old 2600 modem to get that same Atari ST to hook up to Avalon, a pay-to-play MUD, though I never progressed very far and fell afoul of one of the moderators, playing the 'God of Justice' when I said 'TANJ' and meant it. As it turned out there wasn't, as he repeatedly turned me to stone, exploded me and otherwise used his moderator powers to fuck with my character sheet in a manner that would get you suwed for psychological assault these days.

That - and the expense - put paid to my online forays for a while, at least until the days of the 56k modem (and then cable) came around and something Science-fictiony rather than the same ol' fantasy came along. That's when I dived into Anarchy Online for another dabble in online play. The world was engaging, the music great, it was crippleware on launch but it really catered to roleplay with nightclubs, clothing and RP props which, of course, the overwhelming majority of the populace never used. I ended up falling out of love with Anarchy Online almost as quickly as I had fallen in love with it to start with.

I continued to dabble a little bit here and there and I got my online RPG fix mostly from IRC play and e-mail play through The Camarilla. While characters were able to jet-set their way around the world us poor players couldn't, so online play was a good compromise whereby you could get some players and a Storyteller together and play out your international scenes without any real problems. That seemed to work well since the Mind's Eye Theatre rules were fairly light and easy to use, attempts to play other RPGs over the internet weren't quite such a resounding success, fiddliness of rules and dice rolls, coupled with the relative slowness of text chat really slow things down to the point where it's almost impossible to play. For social RP it works fine, but anything too heavy or structured and it seems to break.

Then along came the game that would actually manage to drag me back into what I had presumed to be an RP vacuum, Ryzom. The Saga of Ryzom is a French-developed MMORPG with a truly alien world - Atys - and a very freeform form of play. The world is indescribably gorgeous and the storyline - what was revealed of it - was interesting and still took a back-seat compared to the player actions. Virtually everyone here RPed to some extent and role-playing events actually attracted people to play them. There were no quests or missions, you set your own goals, did your own socialising and somehow it all just worked.

Of course, the problem there was that they launched at the same time as EQII and World of Warcraft and, thinking they could also make a hojillion dollars, the company tried to follow suit with the big success story. Bringing in PvP, some heavy handed metaplot and otherwise boning the existing RP community within the game with badly thought out measure after measure they tried to claw them back with a half-hearted 'create your own mission' add on called The Ryzom Ring, but it was too late and they went bankrupt. Since then the game has been through another owner that didn't seem to know what to do with it either and it's now been bought again, but seems to still be making the same mistakes.

Still, for a brief moment there was the holy grail, an MMORPG where people actually roleplayed! I was so enamoured of the game at the time I got hooked into doing volunteer service for it and created some plotlines and missions for the system, moving the story forward. I got hooked. Here was a way of bringing role-playing to a mass audience and it was fantastic.

Since Ryzom went pear-shaped I've tried a few other games, but nothing yet has matched up to Ryzom at its height. Lord of the Rings Online is steeped in Tolkien's lore and a fun game to play, but there's no RP aside from cybersexing fiends in the Prancing Pony. I play World of Warcraft with some friends but there's no RP there, it's more like a team sport.

I think they're missing a trick in MMORPGs, there's definately a niche of creative people who want something more from their games, a lot of them seem to migrate to Second Life (and I don't just mean the furries and sexual deviants) but they'd probably play a properly done, RP heavy game where they were invested in what went on. If such a thing existed.

Everything is moving online and, lately, I've been working with a company called Socialgears trying to inject some of that creative, RP sensibility into a type of game that's even less obviously welcoming to it than MMORPGs are, the social media 'app' game, with mixed success.

There's definately some sort of sweet spot here and some new audiences to be reached by RPGs, forums and social sites are full of 'RP' forums with people re-living Twilight, 'Playing house', engaging in cybersex of the most creative sorts and playing RPGs without really understanding that they are playing RPGs.

Gaming's not dead, it's changing and so are people's expectations of what a game is or should be. That's something even traditional RPG Games Masters need to be aware of as well as games companies.

LARP
I desperately wanted to like Live Action Roleplay, I really did. I used to dream of going to Labyrinthe in Chislehurst caves and would covet the shiny LARP weapons and costumes but there's certain aspects - at least of the active, physical LARP scene - that just don't really work for me and spoil the experience. Sure, the immersion is closer to total without too much in the way of rules getting in the way, the experience has much more direct 'fidelity' but that can also be part of the problem. Your imagination always outstrips even the best attempts at costuming and it's very hard to mentally edit out a scout hut and superimpose a gigantic, spired castle. The other big problem I have with LARP is that it stifles my opportunity to play things that I am not. If I'm a ten stone weakling with the physical coordination of an epileptic jellyfish it doesn't matter what it says on my character sheet, Joe the Kobold is going to beat seven shades of shit out of me and then give me such a continued drubbing that an eighth shade will be discovered in the aftermath.

Nonetheless, I pressed on despite these misgivings and decided to give it a try. That just cemented in my mind that LARP wasn't for me after I was smacked in the face one too many times and fell knee-deep into a stinking bog in the woods. My refined and comfort-loving sensibility just doesn't seem to fit with the necessities of serious LARPing and my budget doesn't really stretch to buying suits of armour I'll only ever wear once a month.

That's not to say I'm disparaging LARP, if you can overcome these drawbacks and enjoy it, or even revel in it, then more power to you. It's just not quite my thing. I'm jealous if anything!

My next encounters with LARP didn't come along until the salon style LARPs of Vampire the Masquerade and friends. Now, here was some LARPing I could actually get into. With a system base so I could play something that I was not ((though I sympathise with people who have all the scheming instincts of a lobotomised hamster), we were playing indoors, nobody got hit and it gave me an excuse to buy some clothes I COULD wear on the weekends and go out in. This was far more my speed and, considering my extended tabletop group was hitting thirty or forty people at this time the progression to LARP made sense.

For a long, long time this seemed like the perfect solution to LARP for me, it was self perpetuating, big, once we joined The Camarilla fan organisation we were part of a huge international continuity that seemed to contain limitless possibilities. Big mistake. It started out that way and for quite a while it was great, but as with all organisations - especially those filled with creative people - there began to be problems. I'm still a huge fan of shared universes but when you're trying to get so many different play styles to work together in one place and so many people have different interpretations of the source material then there's going to be trouble, especially when they insist on 'one way only' and end up taking all the organisational positions of power through attrition and the Peter Principle.

The Camarilla died a living death as the result of its own bureaucracy, dogmatism, arguments and takeovers from White Wolf that never bore fruit and the whimpering end to the nWoD and nothing's really come along to replace it since.

What I took away from my experiences with LARP were a love of props and tactile gaming, an admiration - tempered with concern - for people who enjoy being smacked in the face and a profound sense of frustration at the squandered opportunities that The Camarilla represented to me and how a very few rotten apples can destroy a whole barrel.

The lasting influence from LARP, for me is that - in serious games - I aim for plausibility, a different thing to realism, and - I think - a better appreciation of how plots, schemes and other social interactions actually play out in a social context. Writing plots and stories for live-action games is a very different animal to writing for tabletop games but you can apply lessons from each to each other. LARPs are healthier when they concentrate on external enemies and allow the players to work together more, tabletop games benefit from giving the players latitude to play out their characters and attention to personal plotting.

My LARP experience may have ended badly, but it was worth having.

In at the Deep End
Unlike the enormous and overhelming majority of people in the world, I didn't start 'proper' role-playing with Dungeons & Dragons. I wasn't even aware that Dungeons & Dragons existed for quite some time. When I went out looking for a proper RPG, in a shop in a shopping area that doesn't even exist any more, I gravitated immediately to Middle Earth Roleplaying (or MERP) by Iron Crown Enterprises because I loved The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings so much, even at that young age. Anyone who knows anything about MERP knows that it was basically just a 'lite' (Ha ha ha...) version of Rolemaster, one of the most baroque, complex and inaccessible RPGs in existence. Unbowed by almost completely not understanding the rules I threw myself into playing it with my customary gusto and it was my roleplaying game of choice for many years.

That might well surprise people, since I seem to be somewhat associated with the 'New Style' or 'rules lite' system movement, these days somewhat inappropriately called 'Indie', but then perhaps grappling with 'Rulesmaster' all those years gave me a greater appreciation for the possibilities of stripping back the rules to get at a more 'pure' gaming experience. Even so, MERP taught me a huge amount about creating a good game world, about making it consistent, keeping the mood of the material and learning to expand on it an an appropriate way. It also put me completely off using figures and maps to the point where I never really used them again until very recently.

After that things turned into a bit of a blur, game after game, willing to play just about anything, but there's some particular stand-out games that I think have informed me and helped make me into the gamer and writer I am today.

• Dragon Warriors: A very simple system and spread across several books, Dragon Warriors was important for a couple of reasons, firstly it was sold in paperback format (a shame the new edition wasn't, though it is great) and secondly it really went for the mythological, British feel to the background, even more so than Fighting Fantasy. The mini-adventures in the backs of the books were also of excellent quality.
• Cyberpunk 2013: If Cyberpunk hadn't laid the foundation none of the 'stylish' games that came along later in the 90s, none of them could have really existed. 2013 also tried for a realistic combat system and while success was mixed, it helped show how system to could guide player behaviour.
• Cyberpunk 2020: A massive improvement in presentation and a progression in system showed that new editions could genuinely improve upon older ones. Cyberpunk 2020 was played for years and years in my group and we still return to the game and the system for near future and transhumanism themed games. It's just a real shame CP3.0 let the legacy down.
• Blood!: Blood! won me back to system-heavy games through the critical hit tables and in the way it played, showing me that a system heavy game could still come through and create an engaging and immersive game, especially in terms of survival horror. I loved it so much I resurrected the game under license.
• Over the Edge: Going the opposite way to Blood! this was a vaguard of 'rules lite' and showed how it could really work well. Characters defined very simply in a setting where you can literally play anything. Challenging as a Games Master and inspirational from a design point of view I still go back to it for inspiration.
• Vampire: The Masquerade: A revelation in its time in terms of presentation, graphic design and the focus of the game upon story and narrative over the game. Arguments can rage back and forth over whether the system married up to the intention and the nWoD is a crushing disappointment compared to the oWoD but Vampire did break the mould and did make roleplaying genuinely cool for a while.
• Mage: The Ascension: Mage was the apex of the Storyteller system and ethos for me, it was downhill after Mage 2nd Edition. A magic system that was inspirational, freeform and could cope with all the different ideas, a sandbox environment and a cosmology that tied together the previously dispirate WoD games. Mage was a work of art and damn near perfect, inspirational for working on systems that 'build themselves'.
• Feng Shui: Feng Shui is a masterpiece of genre emulation and most of it done with only a couple of rules, one of them being stunts. The freeform play and the stunt system, combined with the mood setting book combined to create a clear vision of play.
• Legend of the Five Rings: L5R is something of a strange game, a fantasy Japan, but that excuses some of the strangeness. The inspirational nature of the setting, its detail and the reasonably loose metaplot allowed me to create my most successful 'epic' campaign yet.
• Unknown Armies: After the occult/horror glut of the 90s had seemed to drain that well dry Unknown Armies managed to claim it back a bit and give it a fresher outlook. The horror/sanity system therein was also an inspiration, an improvement on the age old Cthulhu sanity system without rendering it too much more complex. Unknown Armies re-enthused me to the whole genre and showed there were still new spins on the theme yet to be tapped as well as room for more 'conventional' design to do the business.
• HeroQuest: When we wrote Neverwhere we kind of got ahead of some of the ideas in HeroQuest, the definition of characters by their description. HeroQuest showed me this could work in a more sructured game and with a more defined rules.

beeblebear  said: I managed to finish Starship Traveller first time. Not sure how, it was a while back.

To which I say: KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!

Fantasy Fighting
The Fighting Fantasy game books were a revelation but, unfortunately, I don't remember where I got my first one. It was a slightly younger guy, Russell, at school who was really into them, more than I was. He had every single last one of them at the time and used to loan them to me and I'd play through them over a couple of days - apart from Starship Traveller - which like many people I never finished, whether there's any truth to the rumour that it was broken or whether it was simply bastard-fucking-hard I still don't know, but even cheating I never got through it.

Even before we knew what was going on we began reading the books to each other, one person reading the text and one person playing the part of the hero and making the decisions and the rolls for him. We quickly began to get frustrated though, FF game books suffered from the same problem that computer games still do, your choices were limited and even things that made perfect sense you couldn't do, or even attempt. Then Fighting Fantasy, Titan and Out of the Pit came along. Suddenly it all made sense, we could do whatever we wanted, so long as it made some sort of sense. Of course, we didn't quite grasp the idea of making up our own adventures, at least not straight away.

It's safe to say that Fighting Fantasy - and later Dragon Warriors - were the 'ZX Spectrum' of British Roleplaying. Where that computer game us a cottage industry of bedroom programmers who later went on to create a world-beating computer games industry, so FF gave us the beginnings of the quirky and eccentric British RPG industry and, for me, my first steps into genuine role-playing and some of my ideas about what makes a good adventure, traps, settings and the overall 'feel' of a fantasy adventure.

Telling Stories
The other thing I did when I was young was to tell stories and tall tales. Not lying as such, just 'going off on one' and spinning yarns, making stuff up and wittering away happily to myself or to any audience that would listen, walls, chairs, the cat or - eventually - my schoolfriends. I would even read to them from a boy's comic at the time called Spike, which ran various weird stories under the title '5 Minute Mystery' inside it. 2000AD was always the superior comic but the text stories in Spike were better for this.

There was no interaction as such, but I would improvise and add to the stories and when the other kids asked questions I'd make up the answers and weave them into the story. This is a lot of what a Games Master does, though when you're GMing this happens during the flow of the game, not afterwards. Weaving a story, keeping it cohesive, it's a lot like lying and keeping your story straight under constant cross-examination.

From there, things got interesting as I started to make up the basis for our make-believe games. Sure they were unholy blends of the various films, books, comics and so on I'd consumed but the other kids would play along and seemed to think some of these games were 'cool' enough to play along with... in fact, writing that's a startling revelation to me because, shame of shame, it makes me realise that one of my first RP-Like experiences could be termed... *choke*... LARP!
Comments:
gbsteve  said "We don't stop playing because we get old, we get old because we stop playing." Which is a George Bernard Shaw quote, though gbsteve  and Mr Shaw apparently share initials, at least on the internet!

Shaw was a clever fellow and had a talent for saying quotable things but I don't think he was quite on the money there, despite being witty and quotable. I think everyone plays, they just get surreptitious and embarassed about it. There's the old stereotype of the father who buys toys for his kids so he can play with them, but anyone who has ever gotten stuck in a traffic jam and imagined firing missiles out of the headlamps of their Aston Martin or who plays rubbish-bin basketball is playing in their own little way.

In my opinion, what makes us 'old' is that we act like this playing, these flights of fancy, are something to hide, rather than something to celebrate and, perhaps, it's this breach of social etiquette that contributes to gamers being treated a little funny, even in an age when computer game escapism is near universal and genre fiction is all over the TV, those being somehow acceptable.

That's my take anyway.

Imaginative Play
Growing up I was surrounded by books and my dad and my grandmother were teachers, almost all my immediate family were bookworms and my dad had a consuming interest in science and, along with that, in science fiction. I still have most of his old paperback classics of the 70s and 80s in my bookcase (Why don't they still make those short paperbacks I ask you? Why does everything have to be a Hamiltonian or Eddingsesque brick?). I was encouraged to be creative and to let my imagination fly and I was also surrounded by beautiful countryside, the very countryside that inspired Tolkien, Lewis, Richard Adams, Kenneth Grahame, Carroll and A.A. Milne. It was a fortunate childhood and I'm fortunate enough to find myself in the same surroundings again now as I'm writing this (though it's not exactly convenient for the shops or gor getting a gaming group together - more on this later).

In short, it would have been a miracle if I hadn't grown up into the creative whackjob I am today.

Like most children I got my first taste of 'roleplaying' without even realising what it was, we would play out Star Wars or James Bond in the school playground, occasionally - under the threat of kooties - we would be forced to play house with the girls, or occasionally some vague fantasy thing involving princesses and unicorns where it was never quite clear what the whole thing was about. Unlike the other kids I wasn't also interested in football and my interest in imaginative games lasted long after most of the other kids had decided they ought to 'grow up' - around age ten or so - and that they didn't want to play army and run around the woods like a mad thing any more.

Looking back on it I can see the evolution of my interests towards role-playing and it's really as a sort of a justification to continue playing games after the others around me had, instead, gotten into - progressively - football, pop music, girls, studies, work and, ultimately, babies. The structure and the study that goes into it is, basically, an excuse and a method to continue that child-like play at make-believe and to ward off the barbs of critics, not that this always works and not that I'm saying this is a bad thing, not by any means.

I remember one game, a transitive moment in fact, very clearly. Myself and a friend had been dragged into playing one of the girly games (under threat of The Dread Lurgy) but had hit upon the idea of making it far more interesting to us, as boys, by playing at being knights - knights and princesses go together after all. We galloped around the school doing our best impressions of riding on horseback, something which, on reflection, probably resembled a cross between 'I'm a little teapot' and skipping and loudly proclaiming that we 'Must save the princess'.

That was a mistake.

As we passed one of the older children teapot-skipping and dramatically declaring our intent to save the damsel from the dragon, he turned and - with sarcasm I have yet to hear equalled, so withering that it instantly aged me two years - said 'Oh yes, we muuuuussst'.

Instantly we felt like the most foolish creatures in existence and stopped, sheepishly creeping away to go and play British Bulldog instead to reaffirm our boyness. For all I know the poor girl is still there waiting for her knights in shining armour to save her from the dragon.

As roleplayers we need to recognise - and even be proud of - the fact that we're playing, that we're persisting in what children do. We dress it up in rules and shared game-worlds and canonical reference but really, at heart, it's still playing. All that other gumph is just our armour against sarcastic bullies and it works very well indeed.
Q&A
unquietsoul5  asks me about what to do with players who fall asleep in the middle of a game, but then goes on to give his own - very good - answers, rendering my advice largely redundant. Thanks cockbag! :P

So, what should you do if one of your players falls asleep on you at the game? Well, that depends on the context really. The most obvious and universal answer is probably to poke them with a sharp implement, a pencil works quite well - and try to get their attention focussed back on the game while intraveniously feeding them Red Bull. Failing that:

If it's very late: If you've been playing a while before someone falls asleep then you should feel flattered. Clearly they're enjoying the game and are invested in it or they'd have begged of for beddy-bye-boes before they passed out at the table. You should probably come to an agreement with the rest of the group and play on up to a good point for the game to take a break until the next session. You can always poke them with a stick first and see if they want to try and stay awake and play, but the odds are that if one person is passing out then others aren't that far behind.

If they're just really tired: If someone's falling asleep before the game starts, right at the beginning of the game or while the night is still young then things are more complicated. One person shouldn't be allowed to spoil the game for everyone, whatever the circumstances. Falling asleep at the end of a long session is understandable and excusable, falling asleep at the start or in the middle of the action is not so understandable and is a bit disrespectful. If they're that tired they should have stayed home and you could have worked around (see Emergency Contrivance below). Give 'em a poke first to see if they can stay awake,otherwise play on without them, the rest of the group deserves to have a crack at the adventure with or without them.

Of course it might be: As unpalatable as the thought might be the problem could just be that you're being incredibly boring. Your masterpiece adventure might be slow and dragging, you may have slipped into a monotonous drone or you might be concentrating too much on one player at the expense of the others. Yes, boredom factor and sleepiness can be your fault as the Games Master. Consider switching things up a bit, throwing in a combat scene or an argument, getting up and gesticulating, varying your vocal tone. Anything to keep the player's interested and don't be afraid to ask them if it's boring.

Emergency Backup Contrivance Omega IV: If a player fails to stay awake, or, indeed, fails to show up, you can always use the Emergency Backup Contrivance. This can take various forms but ultimately it is a means of providing an In-character excuse for the Out-of-character absence of a particular player and their alter-ego. Use one of the excuses below and consider giving the party a Non-Player-Character hireling or ally to make up for the gap:

• The character has been kidnapped by the villain and his lackeys and is out of play for now, adding to the group's motivation to get to the bad guy and rescue their companion. If they wake up before the end of the game then they 'escaped' with valuable information.
• The character is ill and needs to be left behind to recuperate.
• An emergency at home or some other obligation has called the character away.

Yes, these are all terribly contrived and unsatisfying excuses, but they're better than nothing and a great deal of role-playing is built on contrivance and stereotype. 'You're all at the inn when a mysterious old man enters...'.

Practically every RPG book ever written contains some written advice for the Games Master, the guy or girl who carries the can and the responsibility for a good session largely on their shoulders. This advice is manifold and somewhat helpful but somehow the play examples and the sorts of problems that the Games Master might encounter don't ring particularly true and none of the big problems I've had in my games have ever been dealt with by any advice section I've ever read. This has improved a little over time, the 4e D&D DMs guide has a much better section on dealing with the differing demands of different players but never explicitly points out that they're being an actual problem. It just treats it all very softly-softly and nicely-nicely as it being a clash of different tastes and gaming expectations.

No.

Sometimes the player is just being an arsehole and needs a dry-slap and to be told to stop being a wanker.

Even with these improvements the books have never tackled the sorts of problems I've had as a Games Master. They've never told me what I should do if it's 3am of a marathon session and one player out of the group falls asleep while the rest are still up for it. They've never told me how to handle it if the group has one too many bhong hits and gets a giggle-fit in the middle of a serious scene or what to do if one of them passes out and sticks his character sheet to his face with drool. There hasn't been so much as a hint of how to stay impartial when one of your players is cute and is coming onto you, certainly not if they're doing it with the express desire to get something out of it in the game. There's not been any clue as to how to let down a larper gently about the crapness of their costume or the horrifying morphological transformation that their corset has done to their body.

In short, then, the sort of Games Master advice one gets in RPG books is like passing your driving test. Sure, now you can drive the car from 'A' to 'B' but you've been given no hint as how to handle a car full of swearing drunken people trying to shove you off the road, what to do if a child vomits on your neck from the back seat while you're on the motorway or whether you're allowed to take a piss on the hard shoulder.

We all need real and practical advice sometimes and this series of blog posts, intermittently, will try to deal with some of the real problems that GMs - and players - encounter in real-life gaming groups, rather than the sort of 'Gaming with Dick & Jane' items we find in our gaming manuals.

Feel free to chime in and use the articles as an 'agony aunt' column for your own questions and group problems as we progress.

I know I haven't been particularly communicative here of late, if you want to keep up with me at the moment I'd strongly suggest following me on TWITTER  or over on FACEBOOK or my personal LJ _grimtales_ , which carry my twitter feed. Twitter is something I can dip in and out of while I'm working, while blogging/reviewing takes more concerted effort and I'm snowed under with freelancing for browser games and for Cubicle 7 at the moment!

Still, this is something important so worth making the time to talk about.

Lulu have just recently listed a huge number of POD titles on Amazon, without asking the authors and making it an opt-out scheme. Worse still they have jacked up the price by some 30%, claiming this is due to the Amazon mark-up (which is actually only 15%). Needless to say this makes us look bad as authors and publishers and for many of us causes all sorts of legal issues due to our contractual obligations with writers and artists.

If you're going to buy one of my self-published books, don't buy it from Amazon unless they've discounted it. Buy it from LULU direct or get the PDF from RPGNOW or one of the other sites that sells my work on PDF (e23, Paizo, Yourgamesnow).

If you're a writer or small publisher who uses Lulu, this may be worth checking into for yourselves.