robin_d_laws: Gaming Hut: Flouting the Standard

robin_d_laws (

robin_d_laws) wrote,
@ 2005-07-18 09:25:00

Entry tags:

gaming hut

Gaming Hut: Flouting the Standard

Darrin Bright asks: I was always puzzled why you used "GMC" (Game Moderator Character) in Feng Shui instead of the industry-standard NPC. Were you worried about trademark dilution or something?

In using the term GMC, I’m following the lead of Jonathan Tweet, who first used it in Over The Edge. To my mind the term Non-Player Character commits the unforgivable terminological offense of describing something by what it is not. On top of being non-explanatory, it sounds awkward, too. Yes, readers might suffer some mild cognitive dissonance switching from an accepted term to a new one, but in some cases I think it’s worth it — if it gets you to see a familiar thing in a new way.

For the same reason, I also prefer “series” to “campaign”, which is an outdated holdover from wargaming. And “Game Moderator” to “Game Master” because the new term properly reflects the non-hierarchical dynamic of a fun game. (“Dungeon Master” I have no problem with because it implies no authority over the players.) Both of these coinages also originate with Jonathan and OTE. I’ve since used them in other games, Dying Earth being a prime example.

(Post a new comment)

	laurelt 2005-07-18 07:26 am UTC (link)
	Yes, readers might suffer some mild cognitive dissonance switching from an accepted term to a new one Or in wondering what a major Detroit automaker is doing in a roleplaying game... (Reply to this)

Yes... but no

odhanan
2005-07-18 07:51 am UTC (link)

I agree with this, but only to some extent. Or at least, I think I understand the motivation. Changing the term "Game Master" for Game Moderator, why not?

But I get the feeling that we are often nitpicking on these terms and thus generating effects much more confusing than they should be. By changing constantly the standards of GM/PCs/whatever, we are forcing players to learn time and time again what normally shouldn't be a big deal: the base denomination for comparable functions between games (i.e. GM, players, module, campaign etc). This too is a bad habit RPGs developed over the years. It probably originated with the design of games "like D&D but not using the trademarks of D&D".

I personally see nothing wrong with the term "Campaign" or "NPC". The terms you choose emphasize a theatrical approach of RPGs. While these certainly aren't the worse choices (as opposed to say... "Overgod" and "Player Slayer" for GM), I do not exactly see why this would be necessary at this point. This would be like renaming "Basketball" for "Hoopball" because there isn't a bottom to the basket. Okay. And why not? Is it really necessary though? Not really.

Just my take on this.
Have a great day,
Ben.

(Reply to this)

unseelie23
2005-07-18 08:43 am UTC (link)

I've never really seen the need to change the terms one way or the other... players and GMs will still use the same terminology regardless of what the author uses in the game. For me at least, all GM controlled characters are still NPCs, and the person running the game is always the GM or game master.

If over-indulged in, I do start to wonder why the author felt some need to use different terms for everything... it starts sounding silly after awhile, or I start looking to see if it was done so the publisher could trademark all of their new invented terms.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

codrus
2005-07-18 09:23 pm UTC (link)

For what it is worth, so little of the terminology actually gets used in play (I don't hear players call characters NPCs) that I'm not sure it matters one way or another.

On the other hand, our language is rife with terminology that persists long after the original meanings are gone. Doesn't really matter if campaigns come from miniatures, the extended definition still works.

My 2 coppers: In books about play (or guides on how to run a game), playing with terminology is fine. And maybe for a game that is completely pitched at new players. But otherwise, altering terminology just confuses experienced players (or gets them to mock you).

I'll pull out the tactical nuke of game terminology changes for the sake of changes: Immortal Let's do our serenades and avoid the hostiles. Don't roll a null.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	agrumer 2005-07-18 08:55 am UTC (link)
	Whereas "GMC" offends me by sharing the first two characters with "GM", so your ear has to wait for the third character to disambiguate. "Series" for "campaign" is good. I'd be happier with single-word terms for the other game concepts as well. "Protagonist" for player-character, for example; not sure what that'd make the NPCs, since they're not all antagonists. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	dwarfrage 2005-07-18 09:10 am UTC (link)
	Extra? In the sense that no one is essential to the game except the players? Not thrilled with it, but it's one word. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	the_never 2005-07-18 08:57 am UTC (link)
	I like all your examples and I've never given them much thought before. I think you are right. (Reply to this)

	citations jlhlinnell 2005-07-18 12:43 pm UTC (link)
	I am currently editing a final draft of my thesis, explaining roleplaying games to high school teachers as a potential vehicle for the instruction and discussion of social studies. Do you mind if I borrow your language here, and cite your LJ for a discussion of the merits of these terms? Or should I just pick up my copy of OTE and cite that? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	Re: citations robin_d_laws 2005-07-18 12:56 pm UTC (link)
	By all means, cite at will. (I don't recall if the OTE book explains its preference for these terms or not.) (Reply to this)(Parent)

RPG terms
(Anonymous)
2005-07-18 08:41 pm UTC (link)

"Series": I'm back to using "campaign." I'm not the idealist I was thirteen years ago.

"GMC": Originally used in Different Worlds, maybe? Anyway, not my idea. It looks as though computer RPGs have taught everyone what "NPC" means, so "GMC" has lost the hope of influencing a new generation.

"Game Moderator": Best asset, its initials. For some reason I went back to "gamemaster" for Everway. Maybe I thought it sounded more mysterious.

-Jonathan Tweet
http://jonathantweet.com/jotgamedesignhis.html

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: RPG terms
(Anonymous)
2005-07-19 07:34 am UTC (link)

Re: Series/Campaign - Oh? What was idealistic about "series"? When I'm not trying to put together a dungeon crawl, I actually quite like the idea of thinking of scenarios as "episodes" in a TV-style series. Although what actually happens when people sit down at a table... maybe even "campaign" is a little bit more "Blue Sky" than what really happens. ("Did we play last week? My character is where now?" etc., followed by the four-hour "uh, should we buy stuff?" exercise in coma-inducing performance art.)

Re: GMC - Actually, the term "mobs" (abbrev. for "mobiles", which was codespeak for monsters/shopkeepers from the earlier text-based MUDs) may be used more often than "NPC". NPC as used in MMORPGs can now include player-controlled pets and bots that are player-created but AI-controlled...

Re: GM - could also be "Generic Moniker".

Darrin Bright

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	(Anonymous) 2005-07-19 12:01 am UTC (link)
	Can you not use Storyteller because WW trademarked it? I've always prefered that to Game Master or Game Moderator type things. I don't moderate, I tell stories. The players contribute, and hence some players might be storytellers too (though some really are just players). Of course, if the word is trademarked then I guess you'd have to avoid it in official stuff. (Reply to this)(Thread)

(Anonymous)
2005-07-19 08:00 am UTC (link)

Hmm. I don't actually see "Storyteller" listed under their trademarks on White Wolf's website. I'm not sure they can trademark it, actually. Trademarks refer to elements of trade dress (usually product packaging) - terms and names that can be applied to a particular line of products so they are more easily identifiable to consumers. Although all their products use the "Storyteller system", the term Storyteller isn't actually used in any of their trade dress... you don't buy "Storyteller" products, you buy the "World of Darkness" or "Vampire: the Requiem" products.

The term "Storyteller" as used for a person who sits down in front of a group of people to tell a story or to organize a collaborative work of fiction... that's pretty clearly "common usage" of an average every-day term or activity. For most trademarks, the term and the product you're trying to associate it with can't be too closely related, or consumers could get confused. You cannot, for example, grow a bunch of apples and then try to trademark "Apple" as your product name, since "apple" is already a common term in the produce market for an easily-recognizable product that isn't associated with any particular company. "Apple" and "Computer" have nothing in common, however, so it's much easier to trademark "Apple" as a particular product in the computer market.

One of the dirty little secrets of RPGs is the actual act of getting a group of people together, deciding on some rules, rolling dice to see what happens... you can't copyright, trademark, or patent that type of activity. You don't *need* to even buy books to tell you how to do this. The entire RPG industry is built on an activity that their customers can already do for free.

Darrin Bright

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

drascus
2005-07-19 09:16 am UTC (link)

While you shouldn't technicaly be able to trademark a word like storyteller, that doesn't mean they haven't done it. If it's not listed in their trademarks, then they haven't, but the trademark process gets a little shadey sometimes... hell, most of the time. Which is why I was wondering. ^_^

In any case, that's good news. I definently prefer language that suggests telling stories or the like, over moderator which makes me think more of a debate.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(Anonymous)
2005-07-19 01:27 pm UTC (link)

Well, I should probably back away from the statement that WW couldn't trademark "Storyteller"... a purely descriptive trademark would probably be turned down, but they could try for a trademark under a "secondary meaning". A "Secondary Trademark" means the term can be directly descriptive of the product, i.e. Apple => apple, but customers now associate the term Apple specifically with the company or origin of the product in addition to the primary common usage of the term. Basically, if every customer in the RPG market associates "Storyteller" as a White Wolf product, they could argue that relationship should be protected as a trademark. Secondary trademarks take a lot longer to get, though... I think it takes at least 8 years from the filing date. There's a lot that competitors can do in that time period to muddy the waters.

Then again, if WW's current "licensing" stance aggravates enough LARPers that they decide to publish their own MET/Storyteller material, they may go that route with the trademark, among other things. If the LARPers scrape off enough of the serial numbers and continue to publish/play/etc., and WW tries to go after them for using their "intellectual property"... oy vey, now there's a nightmare of truly epic proportions. "Derivative material" is a HUGE grey area, unless you're a media giant like Disney, in which case the side with the most money gets to decide what is "infringement".

Darrin Bright

(Reply to this)(Parent)

drascus
2005-07-19 09:19 am UTC (link)

Addendum... It's true that you can do role playing for free, escew buying books, etc. But I've taken a shot from time to time at writing up a system, world, etc, and while I've been able to do it, the time commitment is intense. RPG sourcebooks are an excellent time shortcut. For $25-$40, I can buy something that would cost me about 200 hours to produce, on the conservative side.

It's true that it won't be exactly the game I would have created, but that's what house rules are for. The other plus is that it comes pre-playtested.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

mythusmage
2005-07-24 04:42 am UTC (link)

I remember the acronym (as Game Master Character) from Alarums and Excursions many years ago. Back when you, Jonathan Tweet, and I contributed (View From Serendip in case you were wondering). I don't remember who first used it. I do recall the context in which it was supposed to be used.

Namely, a GMC is an NPC somewhat analogous to the PC, only controlled by the GM. A person of importance in the game world and the game's Core Story (using Core Story in a different sense than Mike Mearls did in his essay on the subject).

(Reply to this)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…