Don't get me wrong, Ive heard of this type of Freeform Gming before, I even sort of posted about it in another thread entitled "off the cuff" but the notion still stands in the face of my understanding of how RPGs work.

I too have 30 years experience, primarily as GM, and have always kept my players happy. How I avoided the 'railroading' thing however was a mixture of allowing a bit of freedom in the nuances of a adventure without anything truly threatening the core plot and presenting adventures that were interesting enough my players didn't feel like they had to go off on wild tangents.

If my players, for example, were headed to a particular world for a particular purpose I would have their destination detailed fully, and then perhaps some general notes on other settlements, features of interest, NPCs etc. just in case they deviated a bit. But.. if they suddenly decided while in orbit to change their plan and jump out to another planet they had never visited before (and therefore I hadn't detailed) the session would have been over. No way Im going to pull an entire world out of my backside, not and feel confident it would be as well established, colorful and rich as the environments I create when given some time.

Im a pretty creative guy and as said, have quite a bit of experience but with a universe as full and in depth as StarWars each session requires quite a bit of research to make sure your creations are true to cannon and if completely new, fit in with the established genre. Not to mention, there isn't a spot on in the universe already detailed sufficiently to allow a session to be played without at least a little fleshing out by the GM. RPG are just so damned intimate when it comes to interaction between the PCs and the universe around them. Every session is an exercise in creating reality.

You are under the impression that there is only one true way to GM. There isn't. What works for me may not work for you. I can understand why you would want to break in the session because of the players going completely off the rails. However, I believe you are short changing your players who spent time and money to show up because you cut the session short. The thing about locations in Star Wars is that there isn't anything that says a planet has to be X, Y, or Z. It's up to the GM to decide it for planets not even detailed in the canon. Fortunately, that list of canon planets is rather small and you have the leeway to make up planets as you see fit.

As a DM I've always had to plan out my adventures. I can only remember one game I've ever improvised successfully but it was the best game I've ever ran. I'm running my first session of EtoE next week. I've got no maps and no dialogue. Just vague notes on character's voices and goals and some basic encounter ideas. I'm scared but I'm optimistic. I'm sure the first few sessions will be rough but I refuse to go back to doing all that work for mediocre results. I'm determined to become one of those truly memorable GMs who seemingly makes his games up on the fly and wows his players.

It's nuanced. I like to over prepare since I'm not as good at coming up with things on the fly as I would like to be but I've been working on those skills. What I try to do is prepare the mechanics of the adventure and try to leave the cosmetics to general notes.

So, say your adventure is a standard, land somewhere, get in trouble, get blackmailed to recover a widget from someone, and then return. You put everything together and then the players decide they don't want to go to planet X, and instead go to Y. No worries, the mechanics of the adventure are still completely viable. Now instead of a squad of storm troopers they tangle with, it's a cartel goon squad. Instead of a local moff blackmailing them, it's the local crime boss. etc. If you think about it, almost every adventure has been done before, it's just the cosmetic details that change. Perhaps the location of the mcguffin hasn't been established. You have clues for for planet M, but they misinterpret them to be for planet O. No problem, change the details. Now, it's no longer a secret cartel research facility but secret imperial prison. Players don't need to know the stats of the opponents they are fighting so they'll never even know that you had to change everything.

Now, if you are in the middle of the adventure and the mcguffin has already been established on planet A and they say piss on it and go to B then just hit them with the consequences. Perhaps the hostage the blackmailer had to force them to go is killed. Or slap them with 15 points of obligation as they're now wanted by group X or have a bounty on their head. Players should be allowed to roam where they want, but there are always consequences, and obligation is a great one for dropping a mission.

Short version: you can completely change an adventure without changing anything but cosmetics.

I hope this helps.

I have to say I love this system, but I'm not a fan of the Star Wars universe. I spent several months creating a home-brewed setting, time I also used to give notice we would be switching game systems. The setting itself is familiar to the players, so that wasn't a problem either. I know the setting like the back of my hand, the players have experienced it previously, so if someone knocks over the sand castle I'm okay with it.

I like the movies (EPs IV, V, VI, and VII, and II if I skip everything with Anakin and Padme) but the actual Star Wars universe? Not so much.

Ok, I think Im seeing a miscommunication here. Everyone seems to be focusing on the action, the plot, the "script" if you will. Some say they make it up on their own, others plan it out and follow as best the players will let them. I can wrangle up a yarn as good as anyone I guess, and often do, but its in an established setting, and it there that the real work comes in.

I don't know how much time and effort other GMs put into detailing their settings, the architecture or landscape, the culture, colorful NPCs, things of interest like local market items or beverages, typical types of dress, commonly heard phrases and so on. I really enjoy creating and presenting such details in my games and my players have complimented the depth of detail. Each location feels like a real place with a history, culture and flavor all its own instead of just another spaceport with a cantina full of aliens.

I suppose its possible for a very gifted person to just instantly dream up the intricacies of an alien culture meshed with a space-faring one, alien atmospheres and landscapes, peculiarities of language, NPCs that come across like real people rather than cardboard cut outs, government types and bureaucratic influences, alien wildlife, flora and weather and so on..... but it takes me some time and research to put it all together in a quality way.

Now once the players are there, well sure, I can wing almost anything after that. The stage is set, the actors can perform at will. Trying to create that state on the fly though seems pretty risky, risky in not providing the quality the players expect.

Our very experienced GM has told us how much prep he needs to do for EDGE as opposed to PFRPG... he'd sometimes spend most of his day off prepping the nights game - XP, Loot, level specific encounters etc etc.. with EDGE he needs minimum prep. The minions/rivals/nemesis rules I think have helped him immensely.

Gaming on the fly takes time... you can't be expected to do it from session #1

I think I understand what you are getting at rgrove. In order to present an alive and real world you spend a good amount of time developing that world. Then when the players decide to bypass it and run off to a different world you have to scramble to develop that world into a living breathing part of the campaign. Do I understand your dilemma correctly?

When I spoke about ceding some narrative control to the players, it happens on a couple of different levels.

First, the small scale stuff- this is mainly the ways they spend advantage or threat. If they make a good suggestion that will be fun, but it requires there to be something in the scene or something to have taken place that up to that point had not, let them add their idea to the game. It can be as simple as there being a power conduit or computer terminal there that you didn't mention in your description, or an NPC to walk in at an opportune moment. This is especially probable to come up with triumphs or despairs.

On a larger scale, this means that you let them drive where the action goes by giving them a lot of freedom of choice. The key here in my experience is to let your PCs drive the action and focus on how your NPCs would respond to those actions. That way, the players will feel their choices really matter. You can still add in your story, plot, or seeing details that you have crafted, but you have to be willing to alter or in some ways.

Regarding prep time, mine is usually pretty minimal for this system. Focus on a good opening scene, figure out what the goals of your major NPCs are and how they're are going to do it, prepare or select a few modular encounters, and then come up with a few descriptive details on some locations the PCs are likely to visit. I also spend some time prepping audio, battle mats for any likely major battles, and miniatures, but that isn't always necessary and a lot of people don't use them in this system.

It is rare that the players will get so far off field that they will go to an entirely new planet, but it can happen, and it often happens that they will at least go to a location on the current planet that I did not detail or plan for at all. When that happens, I improvise the major points of the scene, and then I will get the players involved by asking some leading questions, like "What strange food is a street vendor selling here, and what does he look like?" or "Why is there such a large imperial presence in such an out of the way planet?" or "What is the name of the street gang that is approaching you, and what gang are they in a turf war with?". If they get in a fight in these places, your modular encounters will still work, and your macguffin or important NPC could be on this planet instead of whatever one you originally intended.

As someone mentioned, there is no one right way to GM, but I can say that I find this way a lot more enjoyable because I don't feel like I have to do homework to be able to run a game, and my players enjoy contributing. Plus, that means I am employing six creative brains to a story instead of just one.

I think I understand what you are getting at rgrove. In order to present an alive and real world you spend a good amount of time developing that world. Then when the players decide to bypass it and run off to a different world you have to scramble to develop that world into a living breathing part of the campaign. Do I understand your dilemma correctly?

Exactly, not that this was my intended topic when I started this thread. When playing other genres (fantasy, modern military, post apoc etc.) there is a similar problem but its not nearly as bad... your playing in a typically familiar setting afterall. With sci-fi and especially a known fiction like Star Wars the expansion is constant, each move by the players requiring more research, more fleshing out of the universe around them. I find the attraction to run my game like the officially produces adventures stronger than ever, wherein the players more or less just follow along.

Funny, now that I mention that. Everyone harps about railroading but every published adventure Ive ever read is exactly that, a pretty strict script.

Plarfem, good stuff. Involving the players is a pretty novel idea to my group, it might take some doing. They are pretty used to playing the role of actor only and letting me direct. It sounds like it has some merit though, we may just have to try it.

I think I understand what you are getting at rgrove. In order to present an alive and real world you spend a good amount of time developing that world. Then when the players decide to bypass it and run off to a different world you have to scramble to develop that world into a living breathing part of the campaign. Do I understand your dilemma correctly?

Exactly, not that this was my intended topic when I started this thread. When playing other genres (fantasy, modern military, post apoc etc.) there is a similar problem but its not nearly as bad... your playing in a typically familiar setting afterall. With sci-fi and especially a known fiction like Star Wars the expansion is constant, each move by the players requiring more research, more fleshing out of the universe around them. I find the attraction to run my game like the officially produces adventures stronger than ever, wherein the players more or less just follow along.

Funny, now that I mention that. Everyone harps about railroading but every published adventure Ive ever read is exactly that, a pretty strict script.

Well it seems to me that it's rather easy to slap your carefully constructed setting to the planet the players are going, even if it's different from the original one. And unless they are familiar with the planet they will never realize what you did.

Alternatively, prepare some slight variations of the planets but keep the rest the same. So instead of temperate planet with plains and seas (lthey go to a mountain planet with some deserts. but the rest of the setting is the same.