The Worlds of Kaomaris

Open for discussion: should we have the Players (that did not go M-3 I might add) have rate their GM at the end of the game, ie. 0-5 stars ? This could be another feature of the upcoming K2 and would help new Players a bit when they choose their GM etc.

I like the idea. Of course we'd have to find someone willing to take care of this. The page with this rating (before K2 that is) could show how many games a GM has hosted, the average rating and the standard deviation. The last one could show is consistently staying at a certain level or if he has good games along with disasterous games.

trewqh

At the end of the game?
So if I start GMing and never finish any games I'd have a perfect score?

No. A GM who did that would have a score of 0 stars as that would be the typical amount awarded to him in a game. If he tried anything cute regarding averages and division by zero, *someone* might even give him a negative rating for being a cocky bugger.

I remember the days when we used to have a GM of the year. I voted for GM Larry (Calidus) my first year, he was easily the most helpful GM I have ver come across, which makes him the best in my book. Perhaps whoever had the best stars average over the course of the year can get the coveted (now non existant) award?

Have I really been playing that long? Sheesh, must work on getting my VPs up

OK, a question worth asking as I wrestle with running my first "GM_Han" game: What makes a good GM ? Skip the obvious like completing the game and running turns soon after deadline.....anything else? What did Calidus do that got him your vote? In particular, I wonder what sort of commentary players prefer, the one that just describes the changes visible to anyone on the map, with zero extra info, OR the one that for example describes some battles as huge, others as forays, other attacks (not visibly changing the map) as just failing, ie giving interest AND information beyond the changes on the map.....?

~ (GM) Han