> > >Out of curiosity, are the _current_ con directors or rpg co-ordinators of >> >any con on igaming these days? >> > > > > > > Present, but holding off on joining this discussion until I finish RPG > co-ordinating my con, which is in ~3 hours. Busybusybusy. > > -Aonghus Collins, Vaticon RPGs > >> Right, that's over and done with. First things first, if OisÃn's a child, then I'm a baby, because I've only been involved in the Irish Gaming scene for 3 years. However in that time I've RPG co-ordinated 3 cons, written for 2, and spent 2 cons pretty much solidly GMing, so I'm a baby with a little bit of knowledge.
Most of what can be said on this has been said, but there is a few things I feel are worth saying. Firstly, I've been lucky in that I've co-ordinated a reasonably small con, where I'm more concerned about all games running than running extra tables. So, for the most part, Vaticon games are just a single writer's table. Which is, for a small con, a very viable model. But the problem with trying to do that for a larger con is the simple fact that you need to try and predict how many tables will run in each slot, and timetable appropriately. Because there's nothing worse than having to tell a writer that, while you appreciate all the effort he's put in, not enough people wanted to play his game, so it won;t happen. (I lie - there are many worse things, but allow me my hyperbole) Now, having GM'd for most of this past Gaelcon, and similarly at Leprecon two years ago, there's a few things I have to say on the GMing matter. Firstly, the whole "5 minutes go" situation - it's bad, but the only times I've had to do it were the first slots of each of those cons. For all other slots, I was provided with a scenario well in advance, in one case with the time to change the system (long story). In my opinion, one big problem with unprepared GMs comes from them getting the scenario the day before, then going to the pub, waking up hung over the next day, and only then reading the scenario. In this case, it's really hard to make that the RPG co-ordinators fault, in my opinion. The one solution which I think is best is what Gaelcon did last year, where they asked every writer to source another 2 GMs themselves. I was GMing a friend of mines game, and I got the scenario as soon as Gaelcon did. So by the time it came around to it, I was more than prepared, and had discussed things with the writer. Which, incidentally, I always try to do - it's vital, no one covers every base in their scenario. I actually went looking for the poor bastards who had to run my scenario last Leprecon to make sure they had no questions. But I digress. With the BYOGM model, the con can reliably have 3 tables for each game, all of which have a GM who is ready, prepped, and can run it well. Sure, no one's going to be running it better than the writer, and if there ends up being a 4th table then you'll have a guy who's only seen the scenario a few minutes before, but with a decent scenario that;s less of a problem. Actually, on the topic of decent scenarios, for those who didn't attend Vaticon we had a writers prize for the best scenario and, in light of a point mentioned in this discussion, I've put that scenario up on the Vaticon website, as I fully agree with whoever it was made the point that it;s no use saying "This scenario is great" without actually making it available. Also, for those who have RPG co-ordinated before, I'm planning on assembling a howto for it to give to both my successor and the guys down in limerick, who are apparently trying to start a con. If anyone would be interested in putting anything into that, let me know, and I'll post it to this list when I'm done. Aonghus Collins, Former Vaticon RPG Co-ordinator. (I'm Freeeeee!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
