Re: [DL] Would appreciate some feedback...

["Matthew Hanson" <deviantsevant@msn.com>]

> > I have never played in a game with one player in
> > charge of the rest and enjoyed it.
>
>Could you define "in charge"?  Many, MANY games have
>posse "leaders", and superhero games are the obvious
>example of classic Leader-Lieutenant-Follower-Rebel
>party member status.  Sometimes having a certain
>person in the leadership role is trans-systemic; one
>of our Hero games had the leader built on 15 points
>more than the rest of the party.
>

Yes, many games have posse "leaders," but these leaders usually emerge 
during the game through role playing, natural real charisma, experience with 
the setting, or just plain moxy, and are not assigned into a leadership role 
by the GM from the outset. I dunno. Maybe it's just the natural rebel in me, 
and most of my compatriots, but we tend to shy away when the GM says "Okay, 
Bob here's the Captain, Shelly's the First-Mate, Issac, you're the 
Bartender, and you are the Deck Swab." Not that we don't like Bob, but the 
rest of us know that at some point he's gonna be wrong, really wrong, about 
something but insist on ordering us to do it anyway, and the whole GM 
imposed chain of command, along with any semblance of progress in the 
campaign, is gonna come crashing down on top of us as we start a mutiny. I 
guess I go for the team-of-equals strategy over the heirarchical posse 
simply to avoid in party fighting. Some games, like the upcoming Weird Wars, 
may require some level of GM imposed chain of command, but if not directly 
necessary to the setting, I avoid it.

Matt the Drifter
"You're not the boss of me!"
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com