Since the new game has brought novice GM and Players out of the woodwook, asking how to get started, I thought I'd lend a hand. Many, many years ago I had a D6 Star Wars site, and this was one of (the many) things I compiled.

These thoughts, of course, are a matter of personal taste, and your mileage may vary - but I think that 10 years of running a game says I must be doing something right. Feel free to pick and chose - you may not use everything, but at least give some consideration to the thoughts below. . .

Rule one: Fun is the name of the game -
This rule, above all others cannot, must not be broken. If the participants are not having fun, then what's the point of getting together? Everyone might as well be staying at home, watching TV. Now I am *NOT* saying that the characters should win and/or be successful at everything they set out to do. Some of the best game's I've run were one where the players had their butts handed to them on a platter - but everyone still enjoyed themselves. The heroes can lose and still have a good time doing it (case in point - Empire Strikes Back, where the Rebels lost big time, but it was a great movie).

Also - this rule applies to EVERYONE , including the GM. If the GM is not having a good time, it will show through to the work, and the game will suffer for it. Balance the game, so everyone including the GM, is having fun.

Rule One-A: Don't Be Unfair -
This is not a game of 'You' versus 'Them' - there are no winners and losers (well, if everyone has a lousy time, then I guess you are ALL losers). The worst thing for a GM to do is to "play against the players". Let the PCs succeed if you can't think of a reason why they shouldn't, even if they seem to get away too easily. On the other hand, don't give them everything they want, that WILL end up boring in the long run.

Rule Two: Rules are CRAP!
Observation #1: The Star Wars game mechanics consists of lots and lots of rules.
Observation #2: Star Wars is a fast, action packed universe.
Conclusion: If not handled correctly, the game will bog down to a slow, boring crawl.

I wont lie, GMing any game (including Star Wars) is a lot of work. Characters to write up, settings to construct, a good story to write and dozens of rules to memorize. For a beginning GM, it can be overwhelming.

As a GM becomes more and more adapt at the game mechanics, eventually you get to the point where you can determine, without rolling dice, what succeeds and what fails. You learn to streamline the rules to keep up with the fast and loose setting that is Star Wars. The player just bust out a stream of absolutely brilliant dialogue while trying to bamboozle that Stormtrooper - let them get away with it. Do you need to look up EVERY range for EVERY weapon in the fire-flight - just call it medium range and get on with the fight. Know the mechanics well enough to employ them when necessary, but know them well enough to ignore them as well.

Rule Two-A: Dice are CRAP!
At the climax of the campaign, In the final conflict between the characters and Ultimate Evil - the Wookiee rolls enough damage on the very first shot to kill your villain outright. Suddenly the grand confrontation is in jeopardy of being un-satisfying and unrewarding. One shot, one kill. What can the GM do to save the end of the game?

Lie.

The Villain spent a force point, or got really lucky on the wild die - something to keep him in the fight. However, with great power comes great responsibility - never, ever abuse this ability. Alter the game only when Rule one is about to be broken. Also, don't be afraid to use this tactic on the players, also - killing them out of hand from a lucky stormtrooper shot is. . . anti-climatic at best.

Rule Three: No battle plan EVER survives contact with the enemy -
Be prepared to be flexible at any time during the evening. There are more players than there are of you, and they can be a lot more devious than you - so be prepared to diverge off the course you have carefully plotted out, for they WILL come up with coming you hadn't thought of. Of this, I guarantee.

For example - at one point in my game, the Chaos Crew owned a bar on a resort rim world. The GM decided to throw some underworld action at the players, by having the local Mobsters trying to get a cut of the action. The GM fully expected us, in typical Chaos Crew fashion, to go after this Mob Boss guns blazing - and normally he'd be right. However, one of the players casually asked if there was an regional governor election coming up any time soon. Upon hearing that there was one coming up in six months or so- the player then proposed the cunning and subtle plan of: "Lets run for governor and put him out of business the legitimate way!"

All the other players thought it was a great idea, and set about how to out the plan in motion - totally ignoring the direct approach. Meanwhile, the GM, behind his screen, looked down at his suddenly useless stack of NPC thugs and detailed plan of the Mobster's stronghold. If the GM wasn't confidant in stepping off the proscribed path, the game would have come to a screeching halt.

Rule Four: Free will Vs the Story -
There are ways to constrain the characters and make them do your bidding and/or follow the plot of the game. However, these methods must appear to be almost undetectable, or otherwise the game suddenly feels artificial - like if the characters look the wrong way, they'll see the edges of the set, complete cameras and crew. They should feel as if they COULD fly off to Bespin at the drop of a hat if they wanted to.

What's a poor beleaguered GM to do then? The players may be devious, but the GM has a much more potent tool at his disposal - the power to manipulate the universe. The Characters want to leave planet to chase down the villain from last game? The spaceport is locked down due to an upswing in terrorist activity. They want to run for regional governor? The Mob Boss in question kidnaps one of the Character's friends and forces the confrontation. Or the background check is too extensive for them to run with their Rebel Alliance background.

Rule Five: Know where you are going -
You don't have to have the very end of the campaign plotted out in every detail, but certainly have an idea where the story is going. That way, you can start foreshadowing from day one. Little, subtle things - throwaway lines like "He has too much of his father in him." "That's what I'm afraid of.", or slowly revealing more information about the main villain of the game. All of the above will make the conclusion that much more interesting and satisfying when the time comes.

The trick to it is to make sure that what you say makes the players take notice, without being obvious enough that they say to themselves "OK, so the GM wants us to know ______." One thing that I like to do is have a Rule of set ideas for what will develop in the campaign universe: conspiracies, brush wars, military coups, whatever. Once you have these ideas in place you start casually dropping hints about what is to come for all of these ideas, but (and this is the devious GM trick) depending on the actions and interests of the PCs, only a few of your ideas actually happen, or only a few of them are of any importance to the characters! For example, in one session you casually let the players know that a man from an archaeological dig who tends to get drunk and tell incredible stories about ancient technology goes missing. The players automatically think "Oh, the dig must have uncovered something powerful, and somebody wants to make sure that nobody else finds out." Just when they're finishing whatever they are currently doing, and starting to prepare to find out more about this dig you throw them a curve ball and let them know that the guy who went missing was actually on a 2 week bender, but that Star Destroyer that they saw in drydock last month (and have now virtually forgotten about) has just destroyed a New Republic taskforce with an unknown new weapon. . .

And of course the further out you can plot and plan the better. If you can set up the climax of the whole campaign in the very first scene of the first game, then go for it! However, with that level of detail, be prepared to re-write on the fly - again, battle plans and contact with the enemy. Build all the PCs and NPCs with trap doors, just in case of accidental death, unanticipated character disinterest or a sudden flash of GM inspiration. Don't get so locked into The Plan, that you lose sight of telling a good story.

Rule Six: Cause and effect -
Everything the characters do should have an effect on the game world - or if not have an effect, not get contradicted later in the campaign. To do so then gives the players the impression that their actions didn't really matter. Luke blew up the Death Star - there are going to be repercussions, both good and bad, from that. It should be the same for your characters.

One interesting method of showing the players that they don't exist in a vacuum is to prepare a 'newsnet' handout. This contains brief local stories about all types of news, some of which may be foreshadowing for the campaign, and some of which may have nothing to do with them. When the players read about something that their characters did, it's very rewarding for them, and interesting for them to see how the 'other side' sees them.

Rule Seven: Anything you say can and will be use against you -
The biggest bombshell ever to grace the silver screen - "I am your Father!" Now sure you can't unleash a Dark Lord of the Sith on EVERY player, but you can come up with your own twists and turns for your characters. I am, of course talking in a much larger scope than just villains being distant relatives - I mean using everything. That Imperial officer that the players have to capture? Why not make it the same officer who ordered the execution of X-Wing Pilot Bob's family. Suddenly the mission has a very real stake to one of the players, and done right could have a dramatic scene or two (PC1: "Put the gun down, the alliance said we needed to bring him back alive." Bob: "And let him get away - AGAIN ? I don't think so. . .")

But the scope has to be bigger than that - old lovers, academy buddies as underworld contacts, unexpected offspring from that one night stand years ago, characters as descendants of disposed royalty. Each one has just loads of plot potential, either as sideline material or for a full game. Don't waste it.

Rule Eight: Bigger is better -
This is Star Wars - make the games BIG! Not necessarily having the players save the galaxy every week, or blowing up a Death Star on a regular basis (although they SHOULD do this from time to time), but pushing the characters to the limit and beyond. Think of the game a juggling act for the players - keep tossing them more and more balls to juggle until they have so many in the air, they cant blink without having everything come crashing down around them.

Lets say the climax of the game is a simple gun fight between the a gang of Mercs and the players. Put the gunfight in a hospital. - in the nursery ward. Then set the hospital on fire. Then have the Empire show up and surround the building with walkers and scores of stormtroopers. Then have the Imperial troops led by the Dark Jedi that's hunting the characters. And the players are running out of Force Points.

That's when the pregnant rebel operative goes into labor.

This is called the onion style of gaming. The players keep peeling back the layers of the onion until they get to the center - but by the time they do that, they should be crying.

Rule Nine: It's technical. It's one of our little toys -
Don't be afraid to use . . . other materials to enhance the game experience. Bring toy lightsabers and blasters to the game, scatter lead figures across the table, throw the Phantom Menace soundtrack on the CD player, use action figures, bubblegum cards, Pez dispensers, micromachines - anything to make the game more realistic, believable, and fun.

Besides - players love waving around toy lightsabers during a fight.

Rule Ten: Random encounter tables are your friend
ALWAYS have some stock encounters on-hand. Since there are more player brains than GM brains and players are statistically more likely to create a new path than follow the one so carefully and lovingly made by the GM, the GM should "stack his deck" to keep things flowing smoothly even when they're actually flapping for dear life! And there's nothing like a fire fight with some bounty hunters to buy you some thinking time as you reorganize your thoughts. . .

Excellent writeup! To all the soon to be, or new GMs out there: Print this out and refer back to it while planning your game. Revisit it from time to time to keep your mind where it should be as a GM!

I've read really lengthy articles that take multiple pages to say what you have very simply put into a few paragraphs. Well done sir.

This is awesome advice. Nice work!

Disagree with dice are crap. If the players one-shot the BBG it is the GM's job to sell it, am make sure everyone knows just how much of a bad ass that character is. It will be remembered for years longer than the GM's finely tuned balanced fight.

I probably disagree with most of your points. The reason, I think, is that our underlying philosophy is very different. There is no such thing as BadWrongFun, and if this works for you and your group, that's awesome!

The point that best summarizes our different view is:

"There are ways to constrain the characters and make them do your bidding and/or follow the plot of the game."

I don't dictate the story, the players do! They are in charge... I react to them doing stuff.

If I did I could just tell them my epic story-arc, what happens to their characters and then play a boardgame where the outcome isn't pre-ordained. This goes hand-in-hand with your suggestion to fudge die-rolls to ensure that the outcome complies with the GM's plans and wishes.

<As an aside: Am I, as a player, also allowed to fudge die rolls? I mean if the goal is to enhance the fun, can I change that miss into a hit, 'coz, you know, I feel it would be dramatically appropriate and I'd really enjoy that. Or maybe spend some additional skill-points during chargen to make a character closer to my vision?>

If my player's want to leave Bespin, I let them. Are they doing the unexpected? Awesome, I love being surprised. As a GM I don't *want* to know how it ends. I don't plan a final set-piece because I don't know if they'll blow up the Death Star with Vader on board or land up in a one-on-one lightsabre duel with him.

When I run my games I prepare, I don't plan.

I came up with an overall state of things, define the NPC's, their motivations, how things will unfold provided the PC's don't mess things up, define a couple of interesting side-events and work in some aspects of the PC's back-story. After that I let the players loose. I have an idea or anticipation of how things will unfold? I do... initially. However, as the campaign progresses the game will diverge leading everyone (players and GM) into unknown territory. Way more fun for the GM IMHO but YMMV.

This is basically the age old debate of Amusement Park Ride vs Sandbox. In one you sit down for an awesome ride, see and experience cool things but ultimately you're just a passive observer. To be fair, in a typical role-playing game you a little more freedom but I think the analogy holds.

In the sandox, you're pretty much at the mercy of your own drive and initiative. The GM provides you with the sand, toys scattered about and some other kids that are playing in the same box. The rest is up to you...

<Side Note 2: A sandbox has a border... and edge beyond which there is no sand. What happens is players go beyond that line? In my 30+ years of gaming, this has never happened (intentionally at least). Why? Because there is a social contract between players and the GM which basically states: I won't knowingly mess up your mojo.>

To reiterate: I'm not saying your advice is bad. It's just wouldn't work with my group. Each to their own. If you're having fun, you're doing it right.

EDIT:

Here's an article on how to be a better Player (not GM). It's way more aligned with my style...

Some of these tips are solid, but some are a matter of preference. I hate random encounters. Every encounter that you make should have a purpose. It shouldn't ever be just a "Well they needed something to do so I just rolled and they fought that."

I also disagree with the "Dice are Crap" thing. You should attempt to fudge enemy things as little as possible. If they one shot your Big Boss, then they one shot your Big Boss. Turns out he was only second in command. Don't ever sell your players short.

Some good points in there but disagree with rules and dice being crap. I also disagree with using lies to make the story go as you want it to - sometimes that one shot one kill on the main villain if they're just incredibly lucky is absolutely awesome and taking that away from a player is not good. Let the things go as they go and then expand and improvise from there. The players act and I react. Sometimes the world, that is me, acts and then the players have to react. But the players are running the show and they have as much a responsibility to work with the story as I do, but it's their show and I follow their lead as much as I can within the reasons that bind whatever world we're in together. I see my self as the laws of physics, a neutral force that lets players see reactions to the good and the bad they do. But as a person I am on their side. I love their story. It's the telling of their story that makes me enjoy GMing. So when they shout HELL YEAH when they one shot the main boss... I have won!

Dice and game mechanics are the law of physics and they should be respected to make the game consistently random and allow players to know the workings without "God" messing with it all the time. The hard part as a GM is to work with these laws of physics of the game to create a belieavable and fun game. I never cheat with the dice, never. I always roll my checks in the open, unless the nature of the check is secret, but it never is in combat. That said I have killed very few PCs in my 20+ years of GMing. I have pushed the PCs to the very limit and they have survived so many times where it was a really close call. A few times a PC has died in the process and that's what happends. I never ever want to kill the PCs, but if it happends then it happends. I try to run important encounters so it pushes their limits and they know I don't cheat. They also know I don't want to kill them, because I never design or run encounters that way - but some encounters may simply be too much for them and their only option is to run for find an alternative to fighting; I'll make sure they somehow understand this fact, so they can react appropriately to the encounter. But I do push them and I do let fate decide what happends. I'll do what I can within the rules and allow players to do what they can to prevent PC death, but for me the way the dice fall is set in stone. It's the natural order and I don't mess with that. It's unforgiving and brutally honest. But I think I have success running it like that since in all my years as a GM I have killed less than 10 PCs.

If players manage to kill the villain by accident... so be it. But I'd make sure that the odds weren't in their favor, but it would be out in the open - no lies or "haha me tricked you and didn't die at all".

It takes a brave man to tell a bunch of role players dice are crap!

Builds temple out of dice, while rocking and muttering, "Don't listen to the nasty man my preciouses."

Great outline.

First thank you for your contribution. I think that sharing your experiences are a great way to encourage new players, which are the lifeblood of this hobby, regardless of system.

I would like to add a note of caution. What works for one group will not always work for another.

That said I do think we can all agree with your first and second points. As far as fudging rolls/rules, it gets a bit complicated. The GM does need the flexibility to be creative, and sometimes intrepreting the results of a roll can be a bit daunting. In this system specifically, I would say don't always feel compelled to apply every Threat in the most horrible way, and Despair are not required to have an immediate effect. Frankly having a player roll a Despair, not mentioning it, and if questioned saying " there seems to be no immediate effect." can really ratchet up the tension. Nothing like waithing for that shoe to drop!

But I would also have to agree with several of the other posts, that if your players know you'll ignore the dice at whim, then why roll dice at all? Just dictate the actions that seem the most beneficial, and as long as your group is ok with it that is a COMPLETELY VALID way to play. On the other hand, if they get the feeling that the nemesis has the Talent Plot Protection: Immune to death until climactically appropriate, it can cause friction.

For my 2 cents, and this speaks to my background as a Savage Worlds player/GM, my games are a little more untraditional, at least I think. The first 2 sessions or so are spent on character creation, testing, retooling, learning the mechanics, then campagin discussion. I ask each of them what they want out of this game, wither it's combat, a heist, joining the Rebellion, eating babies, or whatever. Then I come up with a cast of nemesis and their forces based upon Obligation/Motivation and this input. After that, i'll throw out seeds, runs, encounters, discoveries, events that can interact with some or all of those villians and see where they go. Keep those others on file, especially if you favor a double/tripple-cross event or two just to keep them on their toes.

There are many much better guides out there on everything from session prep to running a game, but this is just my small contribution.

I'm showing this to our group. This is really good stuff

Way to go Desslok an excellent read.

While every GM has his own varying opinions on a couple of your items, myself included, this is an excellent primer for new GMs. I can only hope they read this thread.

Some good points. Especially Rule #1, if it isn't fun, why bother? I have both as a GM and as a player walked away from games that were no fun.

My personal motto for running fun RPGs is "Never let the rules get in the way of a fun game!" Let the players at least try things that seem appropriate even if there is no rule for it, they don't have the skill, whatever. There may be no zombies in Star Wars, but if your group really want to fight zombies, find a way. Maybe droids with a programming glitch, maybe a parasite, maybe a Dark Force user. Create the Star Wars version of zombies for your game.

As for dice are crap, yes, yes they are. Never build your game in such a way that it hinges on the dice. If the success of the whole Rebellion hinges on your characters making a dice roll, they will fail. If your big villain is in a fire fight he may fall to a lucky hit. Have a back up plan. What if the dice go against you? What if Luke had failed to destroy the Death Star?

To most the folks responding going off on tangents, re-read the second paragraph Desslok wrote.

Gods below people...

Desslok said this may not be for everyone, this is what works for them, but give it some consideration.

With that said, awesome write up Desslok! As a long time GM I use a lot of these techniques myself and it is good to be reminded every so often so you do not lose focus on the game. For new GMs this is some great information to absorb and mull over. Again, not all of it may be for everyone but there is some great information here.

Thanks!

Burleaf

Disagree with dice are crap. If the players one-shot the BBG it is the GM's job to sell it, am make sure everyone knows just how much of a bad ass that character is. It will be remembered for years longer than the GM's finely tuned balanced fight.

While you are free to disagree, FFG has basically sanctioned Desslok's reasoning on this. If you played through the free RPG day module, you'll recall that while the final battle with the nemesis had a fleshed out stat-block, the same page said to adjust the nemesis's health up or down to adjust to the composition of the group. Our group had all chosen heavy hitters, so I ended up hiding the HP until one of the players got dramatic three rounds in and rolled two triumphs on a jumping tackle. If I had stuck to the HP given, the third PC wouldn't have even gotten a shot off, and it would have been a disappointing climax.

Alrightie - let me defend my thesis. . . .

I don't dictate the story, the players do! They are in charge... I react to them doing stuff.

And for the most part, I agree with you. There have been loads of times (both as a player and a GM) where we've gone off the map. There was the one time, our group owned a bar at the beach on a resort world. A mobster rolled into town and started applying muscle for his "protection" - and I fully anticipated that they would react in our usual manner: march into his stronghold and start blowing everything up. Ah, but not this time.

One of the players casually asked "So, are there elections coming up?" - an innocent enough question. I go "sure, what the hell."

"Great! Lets run for public office and take this guy out legally!"

Wait - what?

Suddenly all my carefully crafted notes and maps of the compound and bad guy stat blocks go out the window. Fine, I asked for a recess so I could plan out the back half of the game - and then they proceeded to have a blast running him out of town on a rail with the weight of the law behind them (then planning the newly elected mayor's assassination, so he didn't have to serve out his term of office).

That's an example of going off script that works out. Both sides, GM and Player, working to obey Rule One: everyone has fun. However going off script like - oh, say Luke getting Leia's message begging to have the Death Star plans brought to Alderaan, and then going "Naw, I don't want to do that. I've always wanted to see the Singing Dunes of Clom at sunset" and heading off in the complete opposite direction of the very obvious plot - thats bad.

If Luke's player wanted to head straight for the Death Star, that's going off script that would be ok. If Luke wanted to study the plans, find a weakness himself, assemble a crack commando team and assault the Death Star's self destruct chamber (oh, don't tell me that thing didn't have one) - that too is okay. But if they hire a ship to go to Clom and ignore the plot - well, it's my job to tell an entertaining story, and an off the cuff game around the sunset over the Singing Sand Dunes of Clom is going to be less than sastifying. So - I'll just move the Death Star to Clom and blow it up instead of Alderaan. The plot (more or less) moves forward, the interesting story gets told and everyone has a good time.

That's what I mean.

As for the Dice Are Crap, again we get back to the all-powerful Rule One. If the dice stand in the way of a good story, then they gots to go. Mind you, I don't mean at all times - only when it's a Big **** Hero moment. If we're talking just mook encounters with stormtroopers, let the dice fall where they may. Even more important secondary encounters, and even bigger encounters with arch nemeses - don't bring out the rule. But let's say you're at the climax of your multiple months long campaign. The players have dragged themselves by the skin of their teeth to this point, one shot at blowing up a ancient Sith battle citadel that's about to rampage across the galaxy. Fly into the superstructure, shoot the reactor, get the hell out, save the day - it's Hero Time.

. . . . and then the pilot flying into the War Fortress rolls very poorly, hits a crossbeam and slams the party's freighter straight into a wall and everyone dies. Total Party Kill and the War Fortress moves on to enslave the galaxy. THAT is when you should override the dice. Make the difficulty on the turn less than what it originally was. Knock the sensor dish off the ship so all the subsequent turns are now harder to navigate. Hell, the ship suffers critical structural failure - you have 5 rounds before the ship breaks up, so bring your A-Game to get the job done. Anything other than instantly ending the game on an emotionally unsatisfying downer note.

As for my Rules are Crap belief, that one is simple. Which one is more fun:

As the platoon of stormtroopers open fire on you, the hail of blaster bolts tear up the doorframe around you *pew-pew-pew* You leap through the window, grab your unconscious compatriot and um. . . .roll out the back door just as the grenades land behind you and blow up. *GM makes BOOOOOOM!" sound*

Or

There are 6 Stormtroopers coordinating fire *flip, flip, flip* which gives them a +6 modifier to hit you. You dive through the window giving you *flip, flip, flip* +2 for cover and you need to take a second action to grab your friend and get out the back for a *flip, flip, flip* minus 3 to your roll. Okay, roll it!

Action in Star Wars needs to be fast and hectic, like a John Woo movie on crack, like Jackie Chan on fast forward. Now there's going to be some learning curve as new GM's get up to speed - but if you can get comfortable enough with the game engine where you can memorize, approximate and streamline the rules so you can maintain a breakneck pace - then your game will be better for it.

***EDIT***

Heh, stupid me for repeating the same **** story I did in the first post. That's what I get for posting from work and not thinking through. Okay - another story where the players went off the map and a GM unable to cope. A novice GM was running one of WEG's canned games for the Chaos Crew - The Isis corrdinates, I believe it was. In that game, the Empire gets ahold of a rebel corvette with the location of a Rebel Safeworld with hundreds and hundreds of civilian non-combatants - bad news for everyone there, right. The Empire will be shortly knocking at their door and there's nobody to stop them but our hereos.

The Admiral overseeing the stripping of the corvette parades the little black box with the data in front of our captured team. "Hah, hah, I have the location and you cant stop me!" was more or less the point of the scene. And then our team's Jedi, figuring that one life versus many, decided to take the Dark Side Point hit and blast the little black box with force lightning - something that was NOT in the script.

The poor novice GM pretty much shut down at that point as the wheels fell off the final act of the game. He was unable to get us to the climax, pretty much because of player free will, leading to an unsastifying ending. A more experianced GM could have quickly decided that the Empire made backups of the data, or that the data recovery team could have scrubbed JUST enough off the black box to find the planet - or really any number of things to get the game back on track.

That's what I was getting at.

Star Wars needs to be fast and hectic, like a John Woo movie on crack, like Jackie Chan on fast forward.

Meh. I liked your OP, it summarized how I used to play, and I think mostly has good advice. I'm reserving judgement on fudging the dice, because this game is designed to, and makes it far more interesting to, have everything out in the open. I used to fudge dice all the time, though if crazy results showed I'd reveal them. But how do you plan to do that anyway with this system, roll adversary's dice privately? If most rolls are open, and certain rolls aren't, that's a big hole for player disbelief. It's kind of all or nothing.

In any case, I don't think everything has to be fast and hectic, that's a very narrow view of what is appealing about Star Wars. Think of the tension in E3 when Anakin finds out Palpatine is the Sith Lord. Think of Ashoka in the library trying to track down her lost lightsaber. Yes, climactic scenes are usually action oriented, but the game doesn't need to be one crazy chase after another.

In any case, I don't think everything has to be fast and hectic, that's a very narrow view of what is appealing about Star Wars. Think of the tension in E3 when Anakin finds out Palpatine is the Sith Lord. Think of Ashoka in the library trying to track down her lost lightsaber. Yes, climactic scenes are usually action oriented, but the game doesn't need to be one crazy chase after another.

Fair enough - there's plenty of down time and quiet bits in the movies (and in most games), so there's clearly room for both (and frankly if you did the whole campaign of nothing but crazy balls-to-the wall action 100% of the time, you'd burn out on it). I mean during the action bits you need to know when to sit on the precision rule making and just go with the flow. That's what I mean by fast-forward Jackie Action.

Even though i don't agree on most things Desslok, it's a good text for some GM's and groups. It's certainly good reading.for many people so i bump this

That's when the pregnant rebel operative goes into labor.

This is called the onion style of gaming. The players keep peeling back the layers of the onion until they get to the center - but by the time they do that, they should be crying.

Pwwffft!!! Do tears of laughter qualify as "crying?"

Agree or disagree, and I think most of us feel both ways about different parts of it, Desslok gave us some great food for thought about GMing and how to do it well. It get's us thinking and talking and that is a Good Thing.

Lots of great reminders and ideas there, Desslok! Thanks a bunch! Even long-time GMs can stand to be reminded that it is a game, after all, and fun should prevail

Thanks guys - it's good to know I'm helping folks out (even if I did write this years ago. )

Suprisingly, not much has changed about cooperative social dynamics with regards to the human creature for the past several years.

Again I thank you for your post.