Re: [WW] Hi all!

["Steven D. Nelson" <sdnelson@advancenet.net>]

On Tue, 22 May 2001 PEGShane@aol.com wrote:

> Since WW is a military game, one player inevitably outranks the others and is 
> in charge most of the time. How do you feel about that?

Hmmm... this is a good point.  One that I struggled with in my Twilight
2000 game and that became problematic at times.  Of course in Twilight
2000 you have the luxory of ignoring chain of command as the military was
in shambles at best.  Of course the players who were officers would still
often try to pull rank.

In most of the gaming groups I have been in or GM'ed for, there is usually
someone who either assumes command or has it thrust upon them.  It's not
always the same person, that is often dictacted by the character they are
playing.  Sometimes a person who doesn't want to lead is the one that all
the characters look at and say, "So what do we do now?"

Someone else brought up the point that perhaps a player is role-playing a
bad officer.  This can be interesting, but I'd advise the GM to not let
the bad officer drag the group to their demise.  Don't be afraid to have
the higher brass rain on the party leader's parade.  But certainly let
them roleplay the bad leader if they so desire.

Be forewarned about what it will do to the party's interactions though.
Our gaming group had a player with a tendency to create characters that
would really get on the nerves of some of the other characters.
Eventually these bad feelings transferred from the characters to the
players, and at times there would be an underlying tension or hostility at
the table because of this.  Perhaps it was from the character tensions,
perhaps the players just wouldn't have gotten along anyway, but I still
would keep an eye on this factor when you have a party leader determined
by character development.

At the same time this is a common subplot in many movies.  Where people
follow an incompetant leader because of status.  In many cases a true
leader comes forth and the people will follow that true leader instead
(Think Braveheart and Aliens as good examples of this).  Also a common
subplot is the incompetant leader who only gets by because he has a very
competant subordinate who "feeds" the leader good advice in a subtle
manner, and often then goes on to convince the leader that it was his
idea, or sits back and smiles while the leader takes all the credit.  So a
bad leader does not have to mean that the party will self destruct.

Nominating a player to develop a ranking character can work.  Usually (but
not always mind you) a GM will be able to spot, or will know from
experience, what players will make a good group leader.  By putting a
competant person in this position you can get on with the adventure
without the risk of downtime due to power struggles.  Just to be PC you
may want to find a way to make everyone feel that their character is
special in some way though.  Of course this is an RPG not the media, so
feel free to be NPC (Not Politically Correct... anacronym pun intended).

There are lots of potential pros and cons to this aspect of the game.  But
I think it is essential to the way the game plays out.  For instance, lots
of American gamers may have a problem with the whole liege/servant
relationship that a samurai has in L5R.  I mean who would want to spend
all the time and effort cultivating a character only to find that your
lord orders you to commit suicide to preserve the clan's honor?  But I
cannot imagine playing the game any other way.  The game would lose much
of it's flavor.  And despite the squabbling and power struggles taht arose
from time to time in my Twilight 2000 game, it gave the game a lot of it's
flavor to hear someone barking, "Because I'm the captain you snot nosed
grunt!"

Don't forget about the depth that can be added to your game when the party
leader has to contend with officers of equal or higher level.  Or even
intelligence officers or civilian consultants.  People who are beyond
their realm of command.

It's an interesting topic to discuss, that's for sure.  I'm curious to see
how it will go over in my group.

Steve Nelson
sdnelson@advancenet.net