Played a game of Command Decision awhile ago, and I came up with this idea. I think GM's, instead of leaving the players to choose a leader and develop their own strategy, should give each player a set of orders specific to their command.
Left to their own devices, players will listen to the strongest personality, whether or not he's the best and/or most experienced player. If you had your own, specific orders to carry out, there wouldn't be a need for an overall commander. Plus, it opens up the interesting possibility of having "winners" on both sides.
4 comments:
OK smart guy, what is the problem you are trying to solve with this idea?
I agree it can work, but it can also not work. Natural leaders emerge, that's why they are called 'natural.'
Why would I want to try it?
It's funny, I went to my blog to work on another post, and saw that I had started this one back in October, after the Command Decision game we played during the shutdown. Remember that game?
I thought the post seemed out of context, but wtf, I'll respond.
I have played CD with specific troops having specific missions. The players ignore that usually and just do what they want to do. And then say I should have told them what they were supposed. It's all I can do to refrain from strangling them. It's all fun, though.
You mean players at AOCM or conventions? I think convention players would be more likely to listen.
Post a Comment