Applied Psychology for Referees

In the Zone...
The debut Referee has a state of blissful zen: nothing to unlearn. It's the advantage of a blank slate. For the experienced Game Master or DM, hold on for the ride of your life.

Expectation Management
It's best to start with Expectation Management. This underused concept is the art and science of balancing what an audience wants against what can be delivered. When these two are in equilibrium, whether the characters win, lose or draw against the objectives, the players are satisfied by the experience.

For technical games, training and exercises – it's easier to achieve as the Ref (Facilitator) has a captive audience. For casual games, simulated mayhem among friends, it takes communication, consensus and preparation.

Also, preparation.

And more preparation. Smart, resilient and resourceful players come in ready for anything. The Ref, in response, has to be ready for everything. There's one tool that allows this: flexibility.

Timelines vs Plot Lines
Flexibility is one of the reasons we recommend scenarios run on timelines rather than plot lines. Most plots have to run sequentially to make sense. Further, a lot crafted campaigns have scenes and scene descriptions, and if something is "off" – it degrades the ability to suspend disbelief.

All those "monologuing" jokes in superhero movies? The same thing happens when campaign designers jam a reveal into a bad guy's speech when the characters are captured (or they're about to fight). And there's nothing more fun for players than a scripted capture...

That's not to say that certain encounters or location arrivals can't be scripted, but making a campaign, scenario or situation dependent on one interaction unfolding just so is the kind of artificiality that takes players out of the zone. It's the red flag that lets them know their decisions and their performance doesn't matter.

Minimizing plot lines might seem counterintuitive considering how many writer's references are sprinkled through Speculation. The easy way to define it, from a writer's POV, is that this is a collaborative story. The Ref sets up the raw materials and the prologue, but the plot line is written live – even if some of the characters of this story have a plan that's already in motion.

Shepherding players' characters through a defined plot arc neither reflects a true simulation nor accounts for character will. In the case a whole narrative sequence is scripted, the players are just there to listen to the Ref tell a story interrupted by dice rolls.

...That's a big step toward an adversarial relationship between players and ref.

The other danger of that kind of scenario rigidity is that the NPCs and their respective environments become personal to the Ref. This sparks resentment going the other way when the PCs decide to blow those NPCs away. Now things become antagonistic. For technical games, that's a professional danger. For casual games... these are your friends.

Impartiality for the Referee
Every Ref should want to challenge his players, that's where growth and a sense of accomplishment arise, but keep the perspective of challenging versus defeating. The NPCs may be out to punish the adversary, but the person running the NPCs should not.

Also note that players are entirely dependent on the Ref as their source of information. If you, the Ref, hand out pre-mission briefings, that's an awesome start – but it's only the beginning. The ability of the characters to make the "right" decision is based on your ability to give the player the information that the character would otherwise recognize and act on.

No place is this more apparent than in high-challenge scenarios. Look at one particular setting: Bad Guy Lair #147. That place is riddled with traps, everybody knows it, but if it becomes adversarial between the Ref and the players, the game-play process is reduced to "We move 10 feet and check for traps... Nothing? Okay, we move 10 feet and check for traps..."

There is also the danger of missing that one bit of scripted information that moves the plot forward. I've heard Refs say "Oh, the players never said 'I search the room for treasure or hidden stuff' so they didn't find the note that says where the captive was imprisoned." Seriously? This is the part where the Ref's preparation has to be one step ahead, accounting for the player's characters even if the player doesn't articulate some step.
 * Here is where it's perfectly acceptable for the Ref to provide the inspiration or intuition for the characters. "After that fight, you have a hunch you still might be missing something..."

Articulating the World to the Players
It is no small challenge to keep the integrity of each NPC, the continuity of all their collective motivations, and the distinction that makes any one of them recognizable from the other. Experienced Refs have trained themselves to have an instinctive grasp of unique characterizations. It isn't necessary to take method acting courses to be a good Ref, but it doesn't hurt.

I've known some Refs/DM/GMs that should be nominated for an Emmy at the very least (and an Oscar for the truly gifted). For those who are less expressive: no problem. Set the scene and keep character distinction with your preparation:
 * Have a picture of the NPC available when the PCs are interacting with them.


 * Maps and pictures or sketches of situation locations help, too.

Write it Down...
If you don't write it down, then it never happened.

It doesn't have to be ultra-detailed (unless this is a technical game), but some notes of who did what, where, when and how, is going to keep the event sequence consistent. For campaigns, it's going to be the tool and source Refs reference to disburse experience points.

Also, for whatever balance is maintained between timelines and plot points, smart players are going to make this game a maelstrom of improvisation.

Start Simple
Remember that "Expectation Management" bit? That's the reason players get together before the first game session: find a volunteer to be the Ref and decide what kind of campaign this is going to be.

Here are a few other points...

Start Small

 * Modern experienced players throw around the word "campaign" a lot, as if this is going to be a four-year war with multiple battlefronts. Especially in the beginning, it's a great time to return to the modest "module" roots of gaming with a discrete scenario. This type of low-commitment story gets players used to the system and helps refine expectations before going all-in.

Adventure Hooks

 * Technical games are easy: that's taking a specific policy or procedure, or specific tactics or techniques, and challenging them in a simulated situation. This game becomes a proof-of-concept for the item tested. It's the flexibility of the casual games that can be terrifying for a Ref in a writer's "Blank Page" kind of challenge. The key here is to make the question – and the answer – simple. In this case, ask: what kind of adventure are the players looking for? This might be as broad as choosing a genre or it might be as granular as specifying tasks within a scenario.

Scenarios: Objectives, Situations and Tasks

 * A game session, whether stand-alone or part of a larger campaign, is based on an overall Scenario: a What If...? that Player Characters are there to address. Each scenario should contain at least one large-scale Objective: a specific condition that has to be met to call the mission a success. The scenario can have several Situations: specific points of encounter, often location-based but possibly character-based. Each situation should have specific Tasks which the PCs need to carry out to advance the overall mission success.

SMART Objectives

 * Technical game-players will recognize this and casual game-players will benefit from this: even if the overall Campaign is open-ended, the mission objective(s) of the scenario should fall into SMART criteria. Directly from the HSEEP manual:

Scenario Synopsis

 * Any Scenario should be reducible to one sentence, preferably with a single verb. This is basically how scenarios are sold, and should also be how they are created. The party has to... what? Find something? Save or protect someone? Capture (kidnap) something? Kill someone? Deliver something?

Antagonists / Opponents

 * The players are the protagonists of this collaborative story. Who or What is stopping them? Bad guys? Good guys? Unfriendly competition? Security systems? Body guards? Anonymity? Publicity? This is the basis for the game, the conflict which the characters must face and the players must analyze. Throwing a time limit is another fun factor, and will be dealt with later.
 * Note: the antagonists and opponents don't necessarily have to be villains. This sets up diplomatic or gray-area missions where violence is most certainly not the answer.

Worthy Motivations

 * For technical games, this is easy. For casual games, what's the motivation to engage this scenario? Without twisting arms, how does the party converge, cooperate, and conquer? Without some driving force, most people wouldn't want to face life-threatening action. The rewards should be commensurate to risks (remember that balance thing).

The Rewards

 * Synchronizing players helps standardize what will fulfill their character's motivations to go on this "quest." For the technical games, it's easy: the players in a role where the mission is the mission. It's part of the job. For casual games, especially in potentially open-ended campaigns, there are several possibilities to consider: Professional duty, cash reward, honor, revenge, samaritanship, self-preservation or my cat's favorite: curiosity. Check the Rewards page for more details.

Building the Scenario
Once the basics of the Scenario are established, it's time to develop the details.

We already know the antagonists. Now, let's assume they had a plan that they were going to execute without the PCs changing the equation. They would be undergoing X preparations for Y outcome at Z time. This is where many would consider this creating the plot line. Nope. We know better. These are potential plot points, subject to change without notice...

The Ref has to put themselves into the position of the antagonists. For this exercise, the Ref become the Opposing Force (OPFOR) or Red Cell against the Players, possibly even as the Players game that same Red Team role against their own agency. For the writer types, you're building conflict. The point for the Ref to remember is to keep the parameters of the "bad guys" consistent with their known capacities.

Give the antagonists some contingency and alternate plans to fall back on. Make their resources realistic, not to mention a possible thirst for retaliation. There should be a loose action-sequence time line for the Ref's structure. By adding a timeline, it adds a sense of urgency and verisimilitude to a situation. This is also where NPC staffing, equipment, and locations come into play.

Exactly how much NPC reaction do the PCs inspire?
Whether a military or law enforcement operation, an intelligence or diplomatic mission, the "other guys" rarely drop their objectives and simply go home. There are stakes and they will fight to win. What does that look like, exactly? How do the opponents run interference against the players while trying to get to complete their plans?

How they modify their schedule depends on the severity of threat they think the PCs pose. If the players become the direct target of attention, how the NPCs percieve the players will affect how and what is attempted. If the players have a tactical neuron among them, they should know the value of – and be able to influence – the NPCs estimate of a particular threat.

Be Prepared with Alternate Scenarios
The most complicated, convoluted situations can be solved in a flash of brilliance or luck. If that happens, the Ref should concede excellent fate and ask the players if they are ready to go on from there. Or, just jump right in with a repercussion or some such and give the unfolding plot a new development or twist. Of course, the highest stakes, and the most exciting scenarios, are when the adventures are tied into a grand campaign. Every step becomes a foray in to a mess of political twists and a deep, complicated concept. The possibilities are literally endless.

Don't assume the players will succed at every mission. It would be nice, but major league players that bat  .500 are generally well-respected. The same goes for adventurers in the field. The more they do succeed, the more attention they are bound to attract. That can be good in the money they get, and bad in the in the level of competition they will end up facing.

Feel out the mood of the players before you start an adventure. Generally, although a scenario may be fairly concrete, the mood it is played in should match the players' attitudes. I've found that light and humorous, dark and intense, and gory/gung-ho are the three main player modes. If this is a casual game, and the scenario and the mood don't match, change up the scenario or modify it with a stress-release break. This is, after all, supposed to be entertainment. If you require any more realism than that, join the Marines.